4.5 Article

Systemic Lipopolysaccharide Administration-Induced Cognitive Impairments are Reversed by Erythropoietin Treatment in Mice

期刊

INFLAMMATION
卷 38, 期 5, 页码 1949-1958

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10753-015-0175-4

关键词

sepsis; cognitive impairments; hippocampus; erythropoietin

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81271216, 81300946, 81400876, 81471105]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sepsis-associated encephalopathy (SAE) is a frequent complication in critically ill patients and is associated with long-term cognitive impairments. However, the pathophysiology underlying SAE is poorly understood and the pharmacologic treatment is lacking. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effects of erythropoietin (EPO) on cognitive impairments in an animal model of SAE induced by peripheral administration of lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Mice were randomly divided into the sham + vehicle, sham + EPO, LPS + vehicle, and LPS + EPO groups. EPO was administrated 30 min after the LPS administration and daily afterward for 2 days. Behavioral tests were performed on days 6 and 7 with open field and fear conditioning tests, respectively. The survival rate was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The levels of proinflammatory responses, oxidative stress, and apoptosis-related markers were measured in the hippocampus at the indicated time points. The synaptic morphometry changes in the CA1 region were observed with transmission electron microscopy. Our results showed that LPS administration resulted in high mortality rate and cognitive impairments, which were accompanied by increased expressions of interleukin-1 beta, malondialdehyde, cleaved caspase-3, and abnormal synaptic morphometry changes in the hippocampus. Notably, EPO treatment reversed the cognitive impairments and rescued the brain pathology induced by LPS administration. In conclusion, our data suggested that treatment with EPO reduced the mortality rate and ameliorated cognitive impairments in an animal model of SAE.

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