4.0 Article

Changes in GABA and GABAB receptor expressions are involved in neuropathy in the rat cuneate nucleus following median nerve transection

期刊

SYNAPSE
卷 66, 期 6, 页码 561-572

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/syn.21539

关键词

baclofen; phaclofen; neuropeptide Y; c-Fos; CatWalk

资金

  1. National Science Council, Taiwan [NSC94-2320-B002-003, NSC98-2320-B002-033-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the relationship between changes in GABA transmission and behavioral abnormalities after median nerve transection. Following unilateral median nerve transection, the percentage of GABA-like immunoreactive neurons in the cuneate nucleus and that of GABAB receptor-like immunoreactive neurons in the dorsal root ganglion in the injured side decreased and reached a nadir at 4 weeks after median nerve transection. Four weeks after bilateral median nerve transection and intraperitoneal application with saline, baclofen (2 mg kg-1), or phaclofen (2 mg kg-1) before unilateral electrical stimulation of the injured median nerve, we investigated the level of neuropeptide Y release and c-Fos expression in the stimulated side of the cuneate nucleus. The neuropeptide Y release level and the number of c-Fos-like immunoreactive neurons in the baclofen group were significantly attenuated, whereas those in the phaclofen group had increased compared to the saline group. These findings indicate that median nerve transection reduces GABA transmission, promoting injury-induced neuropeptide Y release and consequently evoking c-Fos expression in cuneate nucleus neurons. Furthermore, this study used the CatWalk method to assess behavioral abnormalities in rats following median nerve transection. These abnormalities were reversed by baclofen treatment. Overall, the results suggest that baclofen treatment block neuropeptide Y release, subsequently lessening c-Fos expression in cuneate neurons and consequently attenuating neuropathic signal transmission to the thalamus. Synapse, 2012. (C) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据