4.6 Article

Posttraumatic therapeutic hypothermia alters microglial and macrophage polarization toward a beneficial phenotype

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
卷 37, 期 8, 页码 2952-2962

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0271678X16680003

关键词

Cytokines; inflammation; macrophages; microglial; traumatic brain injury

资金

  1. NIH/NINDS [R01 NS089443, R01 NS042133]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Posttraumatic inflammatory processes contribute to pathological and reparative processes observed after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Recent findings have emphasized that these divergent effects result from subsets of proinflammatory (M1) or anti-inflammatory (M2) microglia and macrophages. Therapeutic hypothermia has been tested in preclinical and clinical models of TBI to limit secondary injury mechanisms including proinflammatory processes. This study evaluated the effects of posttraumatic hypothermia (PTH) on phenotype patterns of microglia/ macrophages. Sprague-Dawley rats underwent moderate fluid percussion brain injury with normothermia (37 degrees C) or hypothermia (33 degrees C). Cortical and hippocampal regions were analyzed using flow cytometry and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) at several periods after injury. Compared to normothermia, PTH attenuated infiltrating cortical macrophages positive for CD11b(+) and CD45 high. At 24 h, the ratio of iNOS(+) (M1) to arginase(+) (M2) cells after hypothermia showed a decrease compared to normothermia. RT-PCR of M1-associated genes including iNOS and IL-1 beta was significantly reduced with hypothermia while M2-associated genes including arginase and CD163 were significantly increased compared to normothermic conditions. The injury-induced increased expression of the chemokine Ccl2 was also reduced with PTH. These studies provide a link between temperature-sensitive alterations in macrophage/microglia activation and polarization toward a M2 phenotype that could be permissive for cell survival and repair.

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

4.6
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