4.5 Article

Differences in spinal distribution and neurochemical phenotype of colonic afferents in mouse and rat

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE NEUROLOGY
卷 494, 期 2, 页码 246-259

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cne.20816

关键词

TRPV1; CGRP; retrograde labeling; immunohistochemistry; dorsal root ganglion; descending colon; visceral pain

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS41384, NS050758] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Visceral pain is a prevalent clinical problem and one of the most common ailments for which patients seek medical attention. Recent studies have described many of the physiological properties of visceral afferents, but not much is known regarding their anatomical characteristics. To determine the spinal distribution and neurochemical phenotype of Colonic afferents in rodents, Alexa Fluor-conjugated cholera toxin-beta (CTB) was injected subserosally into the proximal and distal portions of the descending colon in Sprague Dawley rats and C57B1/6 mice. Dorsal root ganglia (T10-S2) were processed for fluorescent immunohistochemistry and visualized by confocal microscopy. In the mouse, CTB-positive neurons were most numerous in the lumbosacral region (LS; L6-S1), with a smaller contribution in the thoracolumbar ganglia (TL; T13-L1). In contrast, CTB-positive neurons in the rat were most numerous in the TL ganglia, with a smaller contribution in the LS ganglia. The vast majority of CTB-positive neurons in both mouse and rat were positive for TRPV1 and CGRP and most likely unmyelinated, in that most colonic afferents were not positive for neurofilament heavy chain. In the mouse, the TL ganglia had a significantly higher percentage of TRPV1- and CGRP-positive neurons than did the LS ganglia, whereas no differences were observed in the rat. The high incidence of TRPV1-positive colonic afferents in rodents suggests that hypersensitivity from the viscera may be partially a TRPV1-mediated event, thereby providing a suitable target for the treatment of visceral pain.

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