| Literature DB >> 25887510 |
Shouyao Liu1,2, Rongguo Wang3, Dan Luo4, Qianwei Xu5,6, Cheng Xiao7, Peng Lin8, Zhange Yu9,10, Xuanji Zhao11,12, Rongrong Cai13, Jinhui Ma14,15, Qingxi Zhang16,17, Yunting Wang18.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our preliminary studies indicated that electroacupuncture (EA) at the ST36 and Ashi acupoints could promote regeneration of the rabbit gastrocnemius (GM) by improving microcirculation perfusion, promoting the recovery of myofiber structures, and inhibiting excessive fibrosis. However, the effects of EA on recovery of the electrophysiological properties of the GM after contusion are not yet clear. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of EA at the Zusanli (ST36) and Ashi acupoints with regard to recovery of the electrophysiological properties of the rabbit GM after contusion.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25887510 PMCID: PMC4376503 DOI: 10.1186/s12906-015-0601-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1The animal model of GM contusion and EA treatment. (A) An acute GM contusion model device. (B) The fixed position of the rabbits. (C) EA at the Ashi acupoints of the injured side. The acupoints were located 10 mm from the proximal (anode) and distal (cathode) ends of the contusion midpoint. (D) EA at the ST36 acupoint of the normal side. The main needle was inserted into a standard acupoint area, and the auxiliary needle was placed 5 mm away from the main needle.
Figure 2Comparison of EMG amplitudes at different time points after contusion. The EMG amplitude was measured in all groups at the indicated times. Contusion versus normal, # P < 0.05; EA versus contusion, ▲ P < 0.05; EA versus normal, * P < 0.05 (n = 5).
Figure 3Comparison of NCVs at different time points after contusion. (a) NCVs under the condition of fixed transmission distance. The red wave represents electrode 1, and the blue wave represents electrode 2). (b) NCVs at days 7, 14, and 28 in the EA, contusion, and control groups. Contusion versus normal, ## P < 0.01; EA versus contusion, ▲▲ P < 0.01; EA versus normal, * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01 (n = 5).
Figure 4Expression of AchE in the NMJ at different times after contusion. (a) AchE GENMED frozen section staining at the NMJ (200×) at different time points after contusion. (b) Comparison of AchE expression levels at different times after contusion. Contusion versus normal, ## P < 0.01; EA versus contusion, ▲▲ P < 0.01 (n = 5).
Figure 5Expression of Agrin in the NMJ at different times after contusion. (a) DAB staining of Agrin in the NMJ on days 7, 14, and 28 after contusion (400×). (b) Comparison of the expression levels of Agrin on days 7, 14, and 28. Contusion versus normal, ## P < 0.01; EA versus contusion, ▲▲ P < 0.01, ▲ P < 0.05 (n = 5).