4.2 Article

The early, long-term inhibition of brain-derived neurotrophic factor improves voiding, and storage dysfunctions in mice with spinal cord injury

期刊

NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS
卷 39, 期 5, 页码 1345-1354

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/nau.24385

关键词

brain-derived neurotropic factor; detrusor sphincter dyssynergia; spinal cord injury

资金

  1. U.S. Department of Defense [W81XWH-17-1-0403]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims We examined the time course of urodynamic changes and the effect of the short or long-term inhibition of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) from the early phase after spinal cord injury (SCI) in mice. Methods The spinal cord of female C57BL/6N mice was completely transected. We examined filling cystometry and bladder BDNF levels at 10, 20, and 30 days after SCI, with an additional day-5 measurement of BDNF. In a separate group of mice, anti-BDNF antibody (Ab) (10 mu g/kg/h) was subcutaneously administered using osmotic pumps from day 3 after SCI, and single-filling cystometry was performed at 10 and 30 days (7 and 27 days of treatment, respectively) after SCI. Results Compared to spinal intact mice, bladder mucosal BDNF was increased at each time point after SCI with the maximal level at day 5 after SCI. Voiding efficiency was lower at each time point after SCI than that of spinal intact mice. The number of non-voiding contractions (NVC) during bladder filling was gradually increased with time. In both 10- and 30-day SCI groups treated with anti-BDNF Ab, voiding efficiency was improved, and the duration of notch-like intravesical pressure reductions during voiding bladder contractions was prolonged. The number of NVC was significantly decreased only in 30-day SCI mice with 27-day anti-BDNF treatment. Conclusions Overexpression of BDNF is associated with the deterioration of voiding efficiency after SCI. The early-started, long-term inhibition of BDNF improved voiding dysfunction and was also effective to reduce the later-phase development of detrusor overactivity after SCI.

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

4.2
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