| Literature DB >> 27833763 |
Jun-Ying Wang1, Renbo Chen2, Shu-Ping Chen3, Yong-Hui Gao3, Jian-Liang Zhang3, Xiu-Mei Feng3, Yaxia Yan3, Jun-Ling Liu3, Ingrid Gaischek4, Daniela Litscher4, Lu Wang4, Irmgard Th Lippe5, Gerhard Litscher1.
Abstract
To study the effects of acupuncture analgesia on the hippocampus, we observed the effects of electroacupuncture (EA) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitor on pain-excited neurons (PENs) and pain-inhibited neurons (PINs) in the hippocampal area CA1 of sham or chronic constrictive injury (CCI) rats. The animals were randomly divided into a control, a CCI, and a U0126 (MEK1/2 inhibitor) group. In all experiments, we briefly (10-second duration) stimulated the sciatic nerve electrically and recorded the firing rates of PENs and PINs. The results showed that in both sham and CCI rats brief sciatic nerve stimulation significantly increased the electrical activity of PENs and markedly decreased the electrical activity of PINs. These effects were significantly greater in CCI rats compared to sham rats. EA treatment reduced the effects of the noxious stimulus on PENs and PINs in both sham and CCI rats. The effects of EA treatment could be inhibited by U0126 in sham-operated rats. The results suggest that EA reduces effects of acute sciatic nerve stimulation on PENs and PINs in the CA1 region of the hippocampus of both sham and CCI rats and that the ERK (extracellular regulated kinase) signaling pathway is involved in the modulation of EA analgesia.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27833763 PMCID: PMC5090094 DOI: 10.1155/2016/6521026
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Plast ISSN: 1687-5443 Impact factor: 3.599
Figure 1EA reduced the excitatory and inhibitory effects of brief sciatic nerve stimulation on the firing rates of PENs and PINs, respectively, in sham rats. (a) Example of EA reducing the effects of acute noxious stimulation on discharges of hippocampal PENs in the sham group. (b) Example of EA reducing the effects of acute noxious stimulation on discharges of hippocampal PINs in the sham group. (c) EA reduced the effects of acute noxious stimulation on the firing rates of hippocampal PENs (n = 17) at different times after the noxious stimuli in sham rats. (d) EA reduced the effects of acute noxious stimulation on the firing rates of hippocampal PINs (n = 12) at different times after the noxious stimuli in sham rats. The 10-second stimulation of the sciatic nerve occurred immediately before 0 min, not at 0 min. B on the x-axis stands for the background firing rate before the noxious stimulus. ∗: compared with the control group, P < 0.05.
Figure 2EA reduced the excitatory effects of brief sciatic nerve stimulation on the firing rate of PENs and had a similar reducing effect on PINs in CCI rats. (a) Example of EA reducing the effects of acute noxious stimulation on discharges of hippocampal PENs in CCI rats. (b) Example of EA regulating the effects of acute noxious stimulation on discharges of hippocampal PINs in CCI rats. (c) EA reduced the effects of acute noxious stimulation on the firing rates of hippocampal PENs (n = 14) at different times after the noxious stimuli in CCI rats. (d) EA reduced the effects of acute noxious stimulation on the firing rates of hippocampal PINs (n = 4) at different times after the noxious stimuli in CCI rats. B on the X-axis stands for the background firing rate before the noxious stimulus. ∗: compared with the CCI group, P < 0.05.
Figure 3The differences in effects of acute noxious stimulation on the firing rate between sham and CCI rats. The brief sciatic nerve stimulation had a greater excitatory effect on the firing rate of PENs in CCI compared to sham rats (a) and a similar effect on PINs in both CCI and sham rats (b). Also, EA blocked the excitatory effect of the acute noxious stimulus on the firing rate of PENs in both sham and CCI rats (c) and produced slightly less blocking of the inhibitory effect of noxious stimulation on PINs in CCI rats compared to sham rats (d). ∗: compared with the control group, P < 0.05.
Figure 4EA was ineffective in the presence of U0126. (a) Example of the effect of U0126 + EA and EA only on the impact of brief sciatic nerve stimulation on the firing rates of hippocampal PENs (n = 9) and PINs (n = 6). (b) Combination of U0126 and EA increased the discharge frequency changes of PENs caused by acute noxious stimulation to a larger extent than that observed in the EA group. (c) Combination of U0126 and EA decreased the discharge frequency changes of PINs caused by acute noxious stimulation to a larger extent than that observed in the EA group. ∗: compared with EA group, P < 0.05.