Li Chun-Yan, Ma Wei, Liu Kuang-Pin, Yang Jin-Wei, Wang Xian-Bin, Wu Zhen, Zhang Tong, Wang Jia-Wei, Liu Wei, Liu Jie, Liang Yu, Zhang Xing-Kui, Li Jun-Jun, Guo Jian-Hui, Li Li-Yan
Institute of Neuroscience, Kunming Medical University, Yunnan, Kunming, 650500, China.
Second Department of General Surgery, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, Yunnan, Kunming 650032, China.
J Neurosci Methods. 2020 Dec 1;346:108921. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2020.108921. Epub 2020 Sep 1.
Many studies have confirmed that "in situ ischemia postconditioning" (ISPostC) and "remote ischemic postconditioning" (RIPostC) can reduce cerebral ischemia/reperfusion injury, but there is no comparison was made on the consistency of neuroprotection in ISPostC and RIPostC to different ischemic duration and number of cycles.
We used a transient middle cerebral artery occlusion model to compare the neuroprotection of ISPostC and RIPostC. We conducted ISPostC and RIPostC via brief and repeated MCA and Femoral artery occlusion followed by different ischemic duration and number of cycles. Infarct volume, brain edema, Neurological deficit scores and Apoptosis were evaluated.
First, the ISPostC with three cycles of 10-s occlusion/30-s release of both carotid arteries and the RIPostC with three cycles of 10-min occlusion/10-min release of the left and right femoral arteries can obviously reduce cerebral infarction size, brain edema, apoptosis, and improve behavioral deficits than other approaches. Second, three cycles of ischemia/reperfusion may be the best for RIPostC.
COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): In this paper, we compared different ischemic duration and frequency of ISPostC and RIPostC models to determine the best method. This conclusion helps to unify the experimental methods.
Different ischemic duration and frequency of ischemic postconditioning affect neuroprotection. three cycles of 10-s occlusion/30-s release of both carotid arteries and three cycles of 10-min occlusion/10-min release of both femoral arteries could be the first choice to study mechanisms of ischemic postconditioning and be conducive to the unification of research results.
许多研究证实,“原位缺血后适应”(ISPostC)和“远程缺血后适应”(RIPostC)可减轻脑缺血/再灌注损伤,但尚未对ISPostC和RIPostC针对不同缺血持续时间和循环次数的神经保护一致性进行比较。
我们使用短暂性大脑中动脉闭塞模型比较ISPostC和RIPostC的神经保护作用。我们通过短暂且反复地闭塞和开放大脑中动脉及股动脉进行ISPostC和RIPostC,随后设置不同的缺血持续时间和循环次数。评估梗死体积、脑水肿、神经功能缺损评分和细胞凋亡情况。
首先,双侧颈动脉进行三个周期的10秒闭塞/30秒开放的ISPostC以及双侧股动脉进行三个周期的10分钟闭塞/10分钟开放的RIPostC,相较于其他方法,能显著减小脑梗死体积、减轻脑水肿、减少细胞凋亡并改善行为缺陷。其次,三个周期的缺血/再灌注可能对RIPostC最为适宜。
在本文中,我们比较了ISPostC和RIPostC模型的不同缺血持续时间和频率,以确定最佳方法。这一结论有助于统一实验方法。
缺血后适应的不同缺血持续时间和频率会影响神经保护作用。双侧颈动脉三个周期的10秒闭塞/30秒开放以及双侧股动脉三个周期的10分钟闭塞/10分钟开放,可能是研究缺血后适应机制的首选方法,且有利于研究结果的统一。