4.6 Article

Heterogeneity of aquaporin-4 localization and expression after focal cerebral ischemia underlies differences in white versus grey matter swelling

期刊

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s40478-015-0239-6

关键词

Ischemic stroke; White matter; Grey matter; Microvessels; Astrocytes; Aquaporin-4

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute [HL082517]
  2. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [K08NS089830]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Ischemic stroke, a major cause of mortality, is frequently accompanied by life-threatening cerebral edema. Aquaporin-4 (Aqp4), an astrocytic transmembrane water channel, is an important molecular contributor to cerebral edema formation. Past studies of Aqp4 expression and localization after ischemia examined grey matter exclusively. However, as white matter astrocytes differ developmentally, physiologically, and molecularly from grey matter astrocytes, we hypothesized that functionally important regional heterogeneity exists in Aqp4 expression and subcellular localization following cerebral ischemia. Results: Subcellular localization of Aqp4 was compared between cortical and white matter astrocytes in postmortem specimens of patients with focal ischemic stroke versus controls. Subcellular localization and expression of Aqp4 was examined in rats subjected to experimental stroke. Volumetric analysis was performed on the cortex and white matter of rats subjected to experimental stroke. Following cerebral ischemia, cortical astrocytes exhibited reduced perivascular Aqp4 and unchanged Aqp4 protein abundance. In contrast, white matter astrocytes exhibited increased perivascular and plasmalemmal Aqp4 and a 2.2- to 6.2-fold increase in Aqp4 isoform abundance. Ischemic white matter swelled by approximately 40 %, while cortex swelled by approximately 9 %. Conclusions: The findings reported here raise the possibility that cerebral white matter may play a heretofore underappreciated role in the formation of cerebral edema following ischemia.

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

4.6
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