4.4 Article

Deficiency of aldose reductase attenuates inner retinal neuronal changes in a mouse model of retinopathy of prematurity

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-015-3024-0

关键词

Aldose reductase; Retinal neurons; Retinopathy of prematurity; Oxygen-induced retinopathy

资金

  1. University of Hong Kong
  2. Germany/Hong Kong Joint Research Scheme (RGC) [G HK029/09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a leading cause of childhood blindness where vascular abnormality and retinal dysfunction are reported. We showed earlier that genetic deletion of aldose reductase (AR), the rate-limiting enzyme in the polyol pathway, reduced the neovascularization through attenuating oxidative stress induction in the mouse oxygen-induced retinopathy (OIR) modeling ROP. In this study, we further investigated the effects of AR deficiency on retinal neurons in the mouse OIR. Seven-day-old wild-type and AR-deficient mice were exposed to 75 % oxygen for 5 days and then returned to room air. Electroretinography was used to assess the neuronal function at postnatal day (P) 30. On P17 and P30, retinal cytoarchitecture was examined by morphometric analysis and immunohistochemistry for calbindin, protein kinase C alpha, calretinin, Tuj1, and glial fibrillary acidic protein. In OIR, attenuated amplitudes and delayed implicit time of a-wave, b-wave, and oscillatory potentials were observed in wild-type mice, but they were not significantly changed in AR-deficient mice. The morphological changes of horizontal, rod bipolar, and amacrine cells were shown in wild-type mice and these changes were partly preserved with AR deficiency. AR deficiency attenuated the Muller cell gliosis induced in OIR. Our observations demonstrated AR deficiency preserved retinal functions in OIR and AR deficiency could partly reduce the extent of retinal neuronal histopathology. These findings suggested a therapeutic potential of AR inhibition in ROP treatment with beneficial effects on the retinal neurons.

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

4.4
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