4.7 Article

Rho-Kinase Inhibition Improves the Outcome of Focal Subcortical White Matter Lesions

期刊

STROKE
卷 53, 期 7, 页码 2369-2376

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.037358

关键词

cell differentiation; fasudil; leukoaraiosis; oligodendrocyte; optical imaging

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01NS055104]
  2. Turkish Fulbright Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Delayed treatment with fasudil improves functional recovery after focal subcortical white matter lesion in mice, despite worse initial connectivity loss.
Background: Subcortical white matter lesions are exceedingly common in cerebral small vessel disease and lead to significant cumulative disability without an available treatment. Here, we tested a rho-kinase inhibitor on functional recovery after focal white matter injury. Methods: A focal corpus callosum lesion was induced by stereotactic injection of N-5-(1-iminoethyl)-L-ornithine in mice. Fasudil (10 mg/kg) or vehicle was administered daily for 2 weeks, starting one day after lesion induction. Resting-state functional connectivity and grid walk performance were studied longitudinally, and lesion volumes were determined at one month. Results: Resting-state interhemispheric functional connectivity significantly recovered between days 1 and 14 in the fasudil group (P<0.001), despite worse initial connectivity loss than vehicle before treatment onset. Grid walk test revealed an increased number of foot faults in the vehicle group compared with baseline, which persisted for at least 4 weeks. In contrast, the fasudil arm did not show an increase in foot faults and had smaller lesions at 4 weeks. Immunohistochemical examination of reactive astrocytosis, synaptic density, and mature oligodendrocytes did not reveal a significant difference between treatment arms. Conclusions: These data show that delayed fasudil posttreatment improves functional outcomes after a focal subcortical white matter lesion in mice. Future work will aim to elucidate the mechanisms.

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