4.6 Article

Remodelling of cerebrospinal fluid lipoproteins after subarachnoid hemorrhage

期刊

ATHEROSCLEROSIS
卷 170, 期 1, 页码 141-146

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9150(03)00249-1

关键词

cerebrospinal fluid; lipoproteins; subarachnoid hemorrhage; brain injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lipoprotein particles (Lps) in normal human cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) are distinct from those found in plasma and include unique apolipoprotein E (apoE indicates protein; APOE, gene) containing lipoproteins rarely seen in human plasma. Less favourable neurological recovery after subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) has been observed in patients who posses the APOE epsilon4 allele raising the possibility that apoE influences neuronal survival after brain injury. We analysed Lps from control and SAH CSF testing the hypotheses that following brain injury CSF Lps undergo remodelling and apoE containing Lps are selectively depleted from brain injury CSF. Lipoproteins were fractionated using CSF from six control pools and six patients with SAH on a sepharose 6HR 10/30 size exclusion column. Fractions were assayed for total cholesterol (TC), free cholesterol (FC), phospholipid, triglyceride (TG), apoE, apolipoprotein B (apoB), and apolipoprotein AI (apoAI). Compared to control CSF there were significant (P < 0.05) increases in TC, FC, TG, and apoAI in SAH CSF. Plasma sized apoB-containing lipoproteins and a very small apoAI-containing Lps were identified in the SAH CSF, which were not present in controls. However, despite the release of plasma lipoproteins into the subarachnoid space, there was no significant increase in CSF apoE. These data provide novel indirect evidence suggesting that after SAH CSF Lps undergo remodelling and apoE containing Lps are selectively reduced in brain injury CSF. The remodelling of CSF Lps and selective reduction of apoE containing lipoproteins may reflect an important response of the human brain to injury. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.6
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