4.7 Article

Pleiotropic Long-Term Effects of Atorvastatin on Posttraumatic Joint Contracture in a Rat Model

期刊

PHARMACEUTICS
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14030523

关键词

joint contracture; myofibroblast; atorvastatin; posttraumatic joint stiffness (PTJS); antifibrotic drugs; rat model; fibrosis; inflammation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the effect of atorvastatin on posttraumatic joint contracture using a rat model. The results suggest that atorvastatin reduces myofibroblast numbers and joint capsule collagen deposition, but does not improve joint mobility.
The antifibrotic effect of atorvastatin has already been demonstrated in several organ systems. In the present study, a rat model was used to investigate the effect of atorvastatin on posttraumatic joint contracture. Forty-eight Sprague Dawley rats were equally randomized into an atorvastatin group and a control group. After initial joint trauma, knee joints were immobilized for intervals of 2 weeks (n = 16) or 4 weeks (n = 16) or immobilized for 4 weeks with subsequent remobilization for another 4 weeks (n = 16). Starting from the day of surgery, animals received either atorvastatin or placebo daily. After euthanasia at week 2, 4 or 8, joint contracture was determined, histological examinations were performed, and gene expression was assessed. The results suggest that the joint contracture was primarily arthrogenic. Atorvastatin failed to significantly affect contracture formation and showed a reduction in myofibroblast numbers to 98 +/- 58 (control: 319 +/- 113, p < 0.01) and a reduction in joint capsule collagen to 60 +/- 8% (control: 73 +/- 9%, p < 0.05) at week 2. Gene expression of alpha-smooth muscle actin (alpha-SMA), collagen type I, transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-beta 1) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) was not significantly affected by atorvastatin. Atorvastatin decreases myofibroblast number and collagen deposition but does not result in an improvement in joint mobility.

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