4.7 Article

Re-innervation patterns by peptidergic Substance-P, non-peptidergic P2X3, and myelinated NF-200 nerve fibers in epidermis and dermis of rats with neuropathic pain

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL NEUROLOGY
卷 241, 期 -, 页码 13-24

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2012.11.029

关键词

SNI; PGP 9.5; CGRP; Substance P; NF-200; P2X3; Epidermis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nerve endings in the epidermis, termed nociceptors, conduct information on noxious stimuli to the central nervous system. The precise role of epidermal nerve fibers in neuropathic pain is however still controversial. Here, we have investigated the re-innervation patterns of epidermal and dermal nerve fibers in a rat neuropathic pain model. After applying the spared nerve injury (SNI) model, we determined the mechanical and thermal withdrawal thresholds in the uninjured lateral (sural) and medial (saphenous) areas of the affected hind paw and investigated the innervations patterns of Substance P (SubP), Neurofilament-200 (NF-200) and P2X3-immunoreactive (IR) nerve fibers in the epidermis and dermis. We found a significant loss in the density of peptidergic (SubP and NF-200) and non-peptidergic (P2X3) nerve fibers in the center area of the foot sole at 2 weeks postoperatively (PO). The densities of Sub P-IR fibers in the epidermis and upper dermis, and the density of P2X3-IR fibers in the upper dermis were significantly increased at 10 weeks PO as compared to 2 weeks PO, but were still significantly lower than the densities in controls. However, the density of NF-200-IR fibers in the center area reached control levels at 10 weeks PO. No changes were found in the densities of any of the fibers in the medial and lateral parts of the foot sole. The present results suggest that after peripheral nerve injury, specific nerve fibers have different re-innervation patterns in the epidermis and dermis and that they might be involved in the development of neuropathic pain. (c) 2012 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