4.5 Article

A Mild Traumatic Brain Injury in Mice Produces Lasting Deficits in Brain Metabolism

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA
卷 35, 期 20, 页码 2435-2447

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/neu.2018.5663

关键词

arterial spin labeling; biomarkers; concussion; magnetic resonance spectroscopy; mitochondria

资金

  1. Kentucky Spinal and Head Injury Trust trainee fellowship
  2. National Institutes of Health [R00 AG044445, P30 GM110787]
  3. University of Kentucky
  4. United States Department of Veterans Affairs Biomedical Laboratory Research and Development Program [I01BX003405]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metabolic uncoupling has been well-characterized during the first minutes-to-days after a traumatic brain injury (TBI), yet mitochondrial bioenergetics during the weeks-to-months after a brain injury is poorly defined, particularly after a mild TBI. We hypothesized that a closed head injury (CHI) would be associated with deficits in mitochondrial bioenergetics at one month after the injury. A significant decrease in state-III (adenosine triphosphate production) and state-V (complex-I) driven mitochondrial respiration was found at one month post-injury in adult C57Bl/6J mice. Isolation of synaptic mitochondria demonstrated that the deficit in state-III and state-V was primarily neuronal. Injured mice had a temporally consistent deficit in memory recall at one month post-injury. Using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (H-1 MRS) at 7-Tesla, we found significant decreases in phosphocreatine, N-Acetylaspartic acid, and total choline. We also found regional variations in cerebral blood flow, including both hypo- and hyperperfusion, as measured by a pseudocontinuous arterial spin labeling MR sequence. Our results highlight a chronic deficit in mitochondrial bioenergetics associated with a CHI that may lead toward a novel approach for neurorestoration after a mild TBI. MRS provides a potential biomarker for assessing the efficacy of candidate treatments targeted at improving mitochondrial bioenergetics.

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

4.5
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