4.6 Article

Quantitative ultrastructural analysis of a single spinal cord demyelinated lesion predicts total lesion load, axonal loss, and neurological dysfunction in a murine model of multiple sclerosis

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PATHOLOGY
卷 157, 期 4, 页码 1365-1376

出版社

AMER SOC INVESTIGATIVE PATHOLOGY, INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64650-0

关键词

-

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS024180, R01 NS24180, R01 NS032129, R01 NS32129] Funding Source: Medline
  2. PHS HHS [1F31ME12120] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Infection of susceptible mice with Theiler's murine encephalomyelitis virus results in neurological dysfunction from progressive central nervous system demyelination that is pathologically similar to the human disease, multiple sclerosis, We hypothesized that the development of neuropathology proceeds down a final common pathway that can be accurately quantified within a single spinal cord lesion. To test this hypothesis, we conducted quantitative ultrastructural analyses of individual demyelinated spinal cord lesions from chronically infected mice to determine whether pathological variables assessed within a single lesion accurately predicted global assessments of morphological and functional disease course, Within lesions we assessed by electron microscopy the frequencies of normally myelinated, remyelinated, and demyelinated axons, as well as degenerating axons and intra-axonal mitochondria, The frequency of medium and large remyelinated fibers within a single lesion served as a powerful indicator of axonal preservation and correlated with preserved neurological function. The number of degenerating axons and increased intra-axonal mitochondria also correlated strongly with global measures of disease course, such as total lesion load, spinal cord atrophy, and neurological function. This is the first study to demonstrate that functional severity of disease course is evident within a single demyelinated lesion analyzed morphometrically at the ultrastructural level.

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