4.1 Article

Inflammatory changes in ruptured canine cranial and human anterior cruciate ligaments

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF VETERINARY RESEARCH
卷 66, 期 12, 页码 2073-2080

出版社

AMER VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.2073

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-To compare expression of tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) and cathepsin K and histologic changes in canine cranial cruciate ligaments (CCLs) and human anterior cruciate ligaments (ACLs). Study Population-Sections of cruciate ligaments from 15 dogs with ruptured CCLs, 8 aged dogs with intact CCLs, 14 human beings with ruptured ACLs, and 11 aged human beings with intact ACLs. Procedure-The CCLs and ACLs were evaluated histologically, and cells containing TRAP and cathepsin K were identified histochemically and immunohistochemically, respectively. Results-The proportion of ruptured CCLs that contained TRAP(+) cells was significantly higher than the proportion of intact ACLs that did but similar to proportions of intact CCLs and ruptured ACLs that did. The proportion of ruptured CCLs that contained cathepsin K+ cells was significantly increased, compared with all other groups. Numbers of TRAP(+) and cathepsin K+ cells were significantly increased in ruptured CCLs, compared with intact ACLs. The presence of TRAP(+) cells was correlated with inflammatory changes, which were most prominent in ruptured CCLs. Conclusion and Clinical Relevance-Besults suggest that synovial macrophage-like cells that produce TRAP are an important feature of the inflammation associated with CCL rupture in dogs. Identification of TRAP and cathepsin K in intact CCLs and ACLs from aged dogs suggests that these enzymes have a functional role in cruciate ligament remodeling and repair. We hypothesize that recruitment and activation of TRAP(+) macrophage-like cells into the stifle joint synovium and CCL epiligament are critical features of the inflammatory arthritis that promotes progressive degradation and eventual rupture of the CCL in dogs.

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

4.1
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