4.7 Article

Astrocytic glycogen mobilization participates in salvianolic acid B-mediated neuroprotection against reperfusion injury after ischemic stroke

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL NEUROLOGY
卷 349, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2021.113966

关键词

Ischemia; reperfusion injury; Salvianolic acid B; Astrocyte; Neuroprotection; Glycogen mobilization

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81901079, 82001384]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that Salvianolic acid B (SAB) has a neuroprotective effect on brain reperfusion injury by accelerating glycogenolysis in astrocytes. Inhibition of glycogenolysis weakens the neuroprotective effect of SAB.
Astrocytic glycogen serves as an important glucose reserve, and its degradation provides extra support for neighboring neurons during energy deficiency. Salvianolic acid B (SAB) exerts a neuroprotective effect on reperfusion insult after cerebrovascular occlusion, but the effect of SAB on astrocytic glycogen and its relationship with neuroprotection are not completely understood. Here, we knocked down astrocyte-specific glycogen phosphorylase (GP, the rate-limiting enzyme in glycogenolysis) in vitro and in vivo and investigated the changes in key enzymes in glycogen metabolism by performing immunoblotting in vitro and immunofluorescence in vivo. Neurobehavioral and morphological assessments were conducted to uncover the outcomes during brain reperfusion. SAB accelerated astrocytic glycogenolysis by upregulating GP activity but not GP expression after reperfusion. Suppression of astrocytic glycogenolysis weakened SAB-mediated neuroprotection against the reperfusion insult. In addition, activation of glycogenolysis by SAB contributed to the survival of astrocytes and surrounding neurons by increasing antioxidant levels in astrocytes. Our data reveal that astrocytic GP represents an important metabolic target in SAB-induced protection against brain damage after cerebrovascular recanalization.

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