4.7 Article

Determining the effect of aging, recovery time, and post-stroke memantine treatment on delayed thalamic gliosis after cortical infarct

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-91998-3

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [NS096186, NS 094280]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that secondary gliosis and neuronal loss occur in the thalamus following cortical stroke, with aging mice showing reduced gliosis, and NMDA receptor antagonism significantly reducing thalamic gliosis.
Secondary injury following cortical stroke includes delayed gliosis and eventual neuronal loss in the thalamus. However, the effects of aging and the potential to ameliorate this gliosis with NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonism are not established. We used the permanent distal middle cerebral artery stroke model (pdMCAO) to examine secondary thalamic injury in young and aged mice. At 3 days post-stroke (PSD3), slight microgliosis (IBA-1) and astrogliosis (GFAP) was evident in thalamus, but no infarct. Gliosis increased dramatically through PSD14, at which point degenerating neurons were detected. Flow cytometry demonstrated a significant increase in CD11b(+)/CD45(int) microglia (MG) in the ipsilateral thalamus at PSD14. CCR2-RFP reporter mouse further demonstrated that influx of peripheral monocytes contributed to the MG/M phi population. Aged mice demonstrated reduced microgliosis and astrogliosis compared with young mice. Interestingly, astrogliosis demonstrated glial scar-like characteristics at two years post-stroke, but not by 6 weeks. Lastly, treatment with memantine (NMDAR antagonist) at 4 and 24 h after stroke significantly reduced gliosis at PSD14. These findings expand our understanding of gliosis in the thalamus following cortical stroke and demonstrate age-dependency of this secondary injury. Additionally, these findings indicate that delayed treatment with memantine (an FDA approved drug) provides significant reduction in thalamic gliosis.

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

4.7
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