| Literature DB >> 28491108 |
Dexiong Han1, Zhe Liu2, Gaimei Wang1, Ying Zhang1, Zemin Wu2.
Abstract
Objective. To investigate the effect of EA on regional cerebral blood flow, cognitive deficits, inflammation, and its probable mechanisms in chronic cerebral ischemia (CCI) rats. Methods. Rats were assigned randomly into sham operation group (sham group) and operation group. For operation group, CCI model was performed using the permanent bilateral common carotid artery occlusion (BCCAO) method, and then rats were further randomly divided into model group and electroacupuncture (EA) group. 2/15 Hz low-frequency pulse electric intervention was applied at "Baihui" and "Dazhui" acupoints in EA group. Four weeks later, Morris water maze test was adopted to assess the cognitive function, using laser Doppler flowmetry to test changes of regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF); double antibody sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (DAS-ELISA) to measure proinflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β); western blot to test the protein expression quantities of proinflammatory cytokines, JAK2, and STAT3; and RT-PCR to test JAK2 mRNA and STAT3 mRNA in the hippocampus in each group. Results. Compared with the model group, learning and memory abilities and rCBF and IL-6 expression of the EA group enhanced markedly; IL-1β and JAK2 significantly decreased; TNF-α and STAT3 also declined, but the difference was not apparent. Conclusion. Our research suggests that EA can improve cognitive deficits which may be induced by increasing rCBF and anti-inflammatory effect.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28491108 PMCID: PMC5402249 DOI: 10.1155/2017/5173168
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Performance of rats during navigation test (, s).
| Groups | Training days | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| Sham group | 48.17 ± 4.87 | 23.11 ± 2.12 | 19.67 ± 2.38 | 13.87 ± 1.89 | 7.29 ± 1.05 |
| Model group | 46.76 ± 4.65 | 42.15 ± 3.57a | 35.42 ± 3.08a | 32.77 ± 2.82a | 30.18 ± 2.73a |
| EA group | 50.43 ± 4.35 | 32.51 ± 2.23b | 26.23 ± 2.05b | 18.92 ± 2.01b | 10.89 ± 1.87b |
Compared with the sham group, aP < 0.01; compared with the model group, bP < 0.05.
Figure 1Performance of rats during navigation test. ▲P < 0.01, versus sham group; △P < 0.05, versus model group.
Time spent in the target quadrant ().
| Groups | Time spent in plateau quadrant (s) |
|---|---|
| Sham group | 25.82 ± 2.29 |
| Model group | 16.41 ± 1.88a |
| EA group | 22.37 ± 2.13b |
Compared with sham group, aP < 0.05; compared with model group, bP < 0.05.
Figure 2Time spent in the target quadrant of rats. ▲P < 0.05, versus sham group; △P < 0.05, versus model group.
Changes of rCBF before/after BCCAO (, PU).
| Groups | Before BCCAO | After BCCAO |
|---|---|---|
| Sham group | 160.85 ± 14.08 | 155.89 ± 13.82 |
| Operation group | 157.57 ± 13.93 | 63.15 ± 8.06a |
Compared with the sham group, aP < 0.01.
Changes of rCBF in various groups (, PU).
| Groups | rCBF |
|---|---|
| Sham group | 156.38 ± 14.29 |
| Model group | 89.05 ± 8.18a |
| EA group | 125.89 ± 10.38bc |
Compared with the sham group, aP < 0.01; compared with the model group, bP < 0.05; compared with the sham group, cP < 0.05.
Changes of IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β in the hippocampus (, ng/ml).
| Groups | IL-6 | TNF- | IL-1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sham group | 0.305 ± 0.019 | 0.118 ± 0.022 | 0.223 ± 0.021 |
| Model group | 0.331 ± 0.015a | 0.170 ± 0.012a | 0.336 ± 0.026a |
| EA group | 0.372 ± 0.011ab | 0.148 ± 0.020a | 0.279 ± 0.037ab |
The protein levels of IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β were determined by ELISA. Compared with the sham group, aP < 0.05; compared with the model group, bP < 0.05.
Figure 3The protein levels of IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β in the hippocampus. (a) Representative western blots of proinflammatory cytokines. β-Actin was used as the loading control. (b) Quantitative analysis of cytokine expression/β-actin. ▲P < 0.05, versus sham group; △P < 0.05, versus model group.
Expression of JAK2/STAT3 mRNA ().
| Groups | JAK2 | STAT3 |
|---|---|---|
| Sham group | 1.125 ± 0.164 | 0.795 ± 0.158 |
| Model group | 1.528 ± 0.182a | 1.152 ± 0.164a |
| EA group | 1.292 ± 0.162b | 1.002 ± 0.171a |
The mRNA levels of JAK2 and STAT3 were detected by RT-PCR. Compared with sham group, aP < 0.05; compared with model group, bP < 0.05.
Figure 4Expression of JAK2 and STAT3 protein by western blot in each group. ▲P < 0.05, versus sham group; △P < 0.05, versus model group.