OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of monosialoganglioside (GM1) administered transdermally with laser in the recovery of spinal cord injury in rats. METHODS: Forty male Wistar rats underwent spinal cord contusion using the NYU Impactor. In Group 1, the rats received 0,2 ml of saline intraperitoneally daily; in Group 2, GM1 was administered intraperitoneally at a concentration of 30 mg/kg per day; in Group 3, rats were treated daily with laser at low temperature on the skin, and in Group 4, the daily laser session also contained GM1. All the groups were treated for 42 days. The animals were evaluated by the Basso, Baettie and Bresnahan (BBB) functional scale on days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 after the injury, and by histopathology and motor evoked potential after 42 days of injury. RESULTS: The animals in Group 4 had higher BBB scores compared with the other groups. There were no differences between the groups, or in the comparisons over time. Histological evaluation showed no differences, and no differences were found in the motor evoked potential tests either. CONCLUSION: GM1 associated with the use of low-temperature laser shows no superior functional, neurological or histological results in the treatment of spinal cord lesions in rats. Evidence Level I, Experimental, Controlled, Animal Study.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of monosialoganglioside (GM1) administered transdermally with laser in the recovery of spinal cord injury in rats. METHODS: Forty male Wistar rats underwent spinal cord contusion using the NYU Impactor. In Group 1, the rats received 0,2 ml of saline intraperitoneally daily; in Group 2, GM1 was administered intraperitoneally at a concentration of 30 mg/kg per day; in Group 3, rats were treated daily with laser at low temperature on the skin, and in Group 4, the daily laser session also contained GM1. All the groups were treated for 42 days. The animals were evaluated by the Basso, Baettie and Bresnahan (BBB) functional scale on days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 after the injury, and by histopathology and motor evoked potential after 42 days of injury. RESULTS: The animals in Group 4 had higher BBB scores compared with the other groups. There were no differences between the groups, or in the comparisons over time. Histological evaluation showed no differences, and no differences were found in the motor evoked potential tests either. CONCLUSION:GM1 associated with the use of low-temperature laser shows no superior functional, neurological or histological results in the treatment of spinal cord lesions in rats. Evidence Level I, Experimental, Controlled, Animal Study.
Authors: Allan D Levi; Barth A Green; Michael Y Wang; W Dalton Dietrich; Ted Brindle; Steven Vanni; Gizelda Casella; Gina Elhammady; Jonathan Jagid Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: A F Cristante; T E P Barros Filho; R P Oliveira; R M Marcon; I D Rocha; F R Hanania; K Daci Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2008-12-09 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Brian K Kwon; Cody Mann; Hong Moon Sohn; Alan S Hilibrand; Frank M Phillips; Jeffrey C Wang; Michael G Fehlings Journal: Spine J Date: 2008-03-10 Impact factor: 4.166