4.7 Article

Demyelination and Schwann cell responses adjacent to injury epicenter cavities following chronic human spinal cord injury

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL NEUROLOGY
卷 192, 期 2, 页码 384-393

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2004.11.033

关键词

demyelination; human; spinal cord injury; Schwann cell; schwannosis

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [NS38128, NS45189, NS39282] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The natural history of post-traumatic demyelination and myelin repair in the human spinal cord is largely unknown and has remained a matter of speculation. A wealth of experimental studies indicate that mild to moderate contusive injuries to the mammalian spinal cord evolve into a cavity with a preserved rim of white matter in which a population of segmentally demyelinated axons persists. It is believed that such injured axons have abnormal conduction properties. Theoretically, such axons might show improved function if myelin repair occurred. Schwann cells can remyelinate axons affected by multiple sclerosis, but little evidence exists that such repair can occur spontaneously following traumatic human SCI. Therefore, it is important to determine if chronic demyelination is present following human spinal cord injury. There are no previous reports that have conclusively demonstrated demyelination in the human spinal cord following traumatic spinal cord injury using immunohistochemical techniques. Immunohistochemical methods were used to study the distribution of peripheral and central myelin proteins as well as axonal neurofilament at the injury epicenter in 13 postmortem chronically injured human spinal cords 1-22 years following injury. Of these seven could be assessed by our methods. We found that some axonal demyelination can be detected even a decade following human SCI and indirect evidence that invading Schwann cells contributed to restoration of myelin sheaths around some spinal axons. (c) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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