4.6 Article

Chronic In Vivo Imaging Shows No Evidence of Dendritic Plasticity or Functional Remapping in the Contralesional Cortex after Stroke

期刊

CEREBRAL CORTEX
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 751-762

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhs092

关键词

intrinsic optical signal imaging; ischemia; middle cerebral artery occlusion; rose Bengal; 2-photon

资金

  1. National Institute for Childhood and Developmental Disorders [5R01HD054453]
  2. Larry L Hillblom Foundation
  3. March of Dimes Foundation [1-FY06-357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most stroke survivors exhibit a partial recovery from their deficits. This presumably occurs because of remapping of lost capabilities to functionally related brain areas. Functional brain imaging studies suggest that remapping in the contralateral uninjured cortex might represent a transient stage of compensatory plasticity. Some postmortem studies have also shown that cortical lesions, including stroke, can trigger dendritic plasticity in the contralateral hemisphere, but the data are controversial. We used longitudinal in vivo two-photon microscopy in the contralateral homotopic cortex to record changes in dendritic spines of layer 5 pyramidal neurons in green fluorescent protein mice. We could not detect de novo growth of dendrites or changes in the density or turnover of spines for up to 4 weeks after stroke. We also used intrinsic optical signal imaging to investigate whether the forepaw (FP) sensory representation is remapped to the spared homotopic cortex after stroke. Stimulation of the contralateral FP reliably produced strong intrinsic signals in the spared hemisphere, but we could never detect a signal with ipsilateral FP stimulation after stroke. This lack of contralateral plasticity at the level of apical dendrites of layer 5 pyramidal neurons and FP sensory maps suggests that the contralesional cortex may not contribute to functional recovery after stroke and that, at least in mice, the peri-infarct cortex plays the dominant role in postischemic plasticity.

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