Li Junfeng, Chen Qiuyi, Pan Jintong, Meng Fanqi, Huang Wensheng, Liang Yingying, Yu Xuewen, Qi Ruirui, Luo Peiyin, Qin Haodong, Chen Yueyao, Lin Xiaofeng
Department of Radiology, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital), Shenzhen, China.
Department of Nephrology, Shenzhen Hengsheng Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Front Neurol. 2025 Aug 8;16:1642150. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1642150. eCollection 2025.
Stem cells are widely applied in peripheral nerve repair; however, their therapeutic potential is constrained by immune rejection, inflammatory responses, and a poor regenerative microenvironment. Therefore, reducing the inflammatory response, improving the regenerative environment and dynamically monitoring these processes by imaging techniques are critical. This study examined the effectiveness of electroacupuncture (EA) and bone mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) on acute sciatic nerve injury in rats. By employing intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) MRI, the study monitored perfusion and explored how EA improves the regenerative environment to optimize stem cell transplantation outcomes.
Seventy-two rats were randomly assigned to four groups: EA, EA + BMSCs, BMSCs, and PBS. EA was applied at GB30 and ST36. IVIM-MRI (perfusion fraction f), T2WI, histological staining, immunostaining (CD31, IL-1α, IL-10, PPARγ), and SFI were used to evaluate treatment effects.
At 2-4 weeks, the nerve perfusion fraction f in the EA group recovered faster than in the BMSCs group ( < 0.05). By week 4, the EA group showed the greatest myelin regeneration and nerve fiber restoration ( < 0.05). The expression of vascular marker CD31 and anti-inflammatory markers IL-10 and PPARγ increased ( < 0.05), while pro-inflammatory marker IL-1α decreased in the EA and EA + BMSCs groups ( < 0.05). Furthermore, values were strongly correlated with histological and functional outcomes ( < 0.05).
EA is more effective than BMSCs alone in promoting nerve repair, enhancing blood flow, and reducing inflammation. Moreover, EA enhances the anti-inflammatory effects of BMSCs. The perfusion fraction (f) is a sensitive biomarker for evaluating nerve repair and perfusion restoration.
干细胞在周围神经修复中得到广泛应用;然而,其治疗潜力受到免疫排斥、炎症反应和不良再生微环境的限制。因此,减少炎症反应、改善再生环境并通过成像技术动态监测这些过程至关重要。本研究探讨了电针(EA)和骨髓间充质干细胞(BMSCs)对大鼠急性坐骨神经损伤的疗效。通过体素内不相干运动(IVIM)磁共振成像(MRI),该研究监测灌注情况,并探究电针如何改善再生环境以优化干细胞移植效果。
将72只大鼠随机分为四组:电针组、电针+骨髓间充质干细胞组、骨髓间充质干细胞组和磷酸盐缓冲液(PBS)组。在足少阳胆经的环跳穴(GB30)和足阳明胃经的足三里穴(ST36)进行电针治疗。采用IVIM-MRI(灌注分数f)、T2加权成像(T2WI)、组织学染色、免疫染色(CD31、白细胞介素-1α(IL-1α)、白细胞介素-10(IL-10)、过氧化物酶体增殖物激活受体γ(PPARγ))和坐骨神经功能指数(SFI)评估治疗效果。
在2至4周时,电针组的神经灌注分数f恢复速度比骨髓间充质干细胞组更快(P<0.05)。到第4周时,电针组的髓鞘再生和神经纤维修复效果最佳(P<0.05)。在电针组和电针+骨髓间充质干细胞组中,血管标志物CD31以及抗炎标志物IL-10和PPARγ的表达增加(P<0.05),而促炎标志物IL-1α减少(P<0.05)。此外,f值与组织学和功能结果密切相关(P<0.05)。
电针在促进神经修复、增加血流量和减轻炎症方面比单独使用骨髓间充质干细胞更有效。此外,电针增强了骨髓间充质干细胞的抗炎作用。灌注分数(f)是评估神经修复和灌注恢复的敏感生物标志物。