Suppr超能文献

猴脊髓去传入损伤后的行为恢复与皮质脊髓束发芽的程度无关。

Behavioral recovery after a spinal deafferentation injury in monkeys does not correlate with extent of corticospinal sprouting.

机构信息

Department of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305-5342, United States.

Department of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305-5342, United States.

出版信息

Behav Brain Res. 2022 Jan 7;416:113533. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2021.113533. Epub 2021 Aug 25.

Abstract

A long held view in the spinal cord injury field is that corticospinal terminal sprouting is needed for new connections to form, that then mediate behavioral recovery. This makes sense, but tells us little about the relationship between corticospinal sprouting extent and recovery potential. The inference has been that more extensive axonal sprouting predicts greater recovery, though there is little evidence to support this. Here we addressed this by comparing behavioral data from monkeys that had received one of two established deafferentation spinal injury models in monkeys (Darian-Smith et al., 2014, Fisher et al., 2019, 2020). Both injuries cut similar afferent pools supplying the thumb, index and middle fingers of one hand but each resulted in a very different corticospinal tract (CST) sprouting response. Following a cervical dorsal root lesion, the somatosensory CST retracted significantly, while the motor CST stayed largely intact. In contrast, when a dorsal column lesion was combined with the DRL, somatosensory and motor CSTs sprouted dramatically within the cervical cord. How these two responses relate to the behavioral outcome was not clear. Here we analyzed the behavioral outcome for the two lesions, and provide a clear example that sprouting extent does not track with behavioral recovery.

摘要

在脊髓损伤领域,长期以来的观点是,皮质脊髓终末发芽是形成新连接所必需的,这些新连接进而介导行为恢复。这是有道理的,但它几乎没有告诉我们皮质脊髓发芽程度与恢复潜力之间的关系。人们推断,更广泛的轴突发芽预示着更大的恢复,但几乎没有证据支持这一点。在这里,我们通过比较猴子接受两种已建立的去传入脊髓损伤模型之一后的行为数据来解决这个问题(Darian-Smith 等人,2014 年;Fisher 等人,2019 年,2020 年)。这两种损伤切断了供应一只手的拇指、食指和中指的相似传入池,但每种损伤都导致了非常不同的皮质脊髓束(CST)发芽反应。颈背根损伤后,感觉 CST 明显回缩,而运动 CST 基本保持完整。相比之下,当背柱损伤与 DRL 结合时,感觉和运动 CST 在颈髓内大量发芽。这两种反应与行为结果的关系尚不清楚。在这里,我们分析了这两种损伤的行为结果,并提供了一个明确的例子,即发芽程度与行为恢复没有关联。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

5
Sensory and descending motor circuitry during development and injury.发育和损伤过程中的感觉和下行运动回路。
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2018 Dec;53:156-161. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2018.08.008. Epub 2018 Sep 8.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验