| Literature DB >> 28831114 |
Haining Zhu1,2, Xuezhi Wang1,2, Meng Huang1,2,3, Yi Jing1, Di Zhang1,2, Guanghong Ding4,5.
Abstract
This research was conducted to verify the structural and functional characteristics of mast cells in the electroacupuncture (EA) effects on bradycardia. First, we examined the mast cell density at PC 6, adjacent acupoint LU 7, and a non-acupoint. We tested the effects of EA at PC 6 on heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) in rabbits with pituitrin-induced bradycardia. We also injected sodium cromolyn (Cro), a mast cell membrane stabilizer, at PC 6 30 min before EA to investigate if it affected the EA effects. The results showed that in both PC 6 and LU 7, the mast cell densities were higher than in the non-acupoint (P < 0.05). EA could induce mast cell degranulation at PC 6, which could be suppressed by sodium cromolyn (P < 0.05). EA improved HR, though the change was relatively small in the initial stage with a significant change at 35 min after modelling (P < 0.05). BP significantly improved at 10 min after the onset of pituitrin-induced bradycardia (P < 0.05). The EA effects on both HR and BP were suppressed by sodium cromolyn (P < 0.05). Therefore, we concluded that mast cells in the acupoint are important for the EA effects against pituitrin-induced bradycardia in rabbits.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28831114 PMCID: PMC5567246 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-08855-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Densities of mast cells in the dermal tissue at PC 6, LU 7 and the non-acupoint (×400). Indicates mast cells.
Figure 2Numbers of mast cells in PC 6, LU 7 and the non-acupoint (n = 3).
Figure 3Degranulation of the mast cells in PC 6 after EA. (×400). The mast cells were stained with toluidine blue combined with safranine O. Note that after EA, the mast cells in PC 6 were degranulated, as shown by . In the Cro + EA group, most mast cells were stable without granules released, as shown by .
Figure 4Degranulation ratios of mast cells in PC 6 after EA vs. Cro + EA (n = 3).
Figure 5Average relative heart rate in different groups (n = 5–6). The heart rate was recorded in each animal by ECG. The average of every 10 s was calculated. The average relative heart rate in each group is shown with different colours. Intravenous pituitrin was injected to induce bradycardia 5 min after recording (indicated as “Modelling”, dashed line). EA was applied at PC 6 at 3 min after modelling (shadow area).
Comparison of relative heart rates among the groups (AVG ± SEM).
| Time | Control | Model | EA | EA + Cro |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (min) | N = 5 | N = 5 | N = 5 | N = 6 |
| −5 | 100.2 ± 0.41 | 100.33 ± 0.14 | 100.21 ± 0.09 | 98.32 ± 2.18 |
| 5 | 97.56 ± 1.47 | 55.01 ± 7.28* | 61.75 ± 4.73 | 59.67 ± 4.35 |
| 10 | 97.46 ± 0.73 | 63.57 ± 5.26* | 68.36 ± 4.81 | 68.09 ± 3.52 |
| 15 | 97.06 ± 0.48 | 69.57 ± 2.69* | 75.99 ± 4.42 | 73.26 ± 4.28 |
| 20 | 97.94 ± 0.96 | 73.69 ± 3.39* | 80.19 ± 3.13 | 76.23 ± 4.19 |
| 25 | 99.62 ± 1.2 | 77.56 ± 3.61* | 84.33 ± 2.25 | 79.72 ± 3.73 |
| 30 | 99.12 ± 1.76 | 81.49 ± 3.6* | 87.64 ± 1.7 | 81.99 ± 2.96 |
| 35 | 98.6 ± 1.14 | 84.21 ± 2.97* | 90.75 ± 1.63⚫ | 84.56 ± 2.33○ |
| 40 | 99.32 ± 2.11 | 86.59 ± 2.45* | 92.33 ± 2 | 86.68 ± 1.72○ |
| 45 | 100.72 ± 2.55 | 87.67 ± 2.01* | 92.58 ± 1.98 | 88.27 ± 1.63 |
| 50 | 101.1 ± 3.62 | 88.7 ± 1.63* | 93.18 ± 2.02 | 88.95 ± 1.54 |
| 55 | 100.72 ± 3.11 | 90.31 ± 1.74* | 93.45 ± 1.74 | 89.51 ± 1.74 |
*P < 0.05, Control vs. Model; ●P < 0.05, Model vs. EA; ○P < 0.05, EA + Cro vs. EA.
Figure 6Relative blood pressures among different groups (n = 5–6). Blood pressure was measured at the left carotid artery. The average of 50 beats was calculated for every 20 s. The average relative blood pressures of each group are shown with different colours. An intravenous injection of pituitrin was applied to induce bradycardia 5 min after recording, indicated as “Modelling” with a dashed line. EA was applied at PC 6 at 3 min after modelling (shadow area).
Comparison of the relative blood pressures among the groups (AVG ± SEM, n = 5–6).
| Time | Control | Model | EA | Cro + EA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (min) | N = 5 | N = 5 | N = 5 | N = 6 |
| −5 | 98.25 ± 1.31 | 102.09 ± 1.65 | 100.9 ± 2.46 | 98.29 ± 0.63 |
| 5 | 98.7 ± 0.83 | 69.59 ± 14.39 | 83.36 ± 14.77 | 65.02 ± 10.35 |
| 10 | 102.7 ± 2.43 | 57.77 ± 2.74* | 76.64 ± 5.17● | 61.04 ± 5.92○ |
| 15 | 99.21 ± 0.8 | 65.61 ± 5.17* | 82.8 ± 6.47● | 68.17 ± 5.55 |
| 20 | 100.22 ± 1.71 | 69.73 ± 8.5* | 88.66 ± 8.03 | 80.08 ± 4.37○ |
| 25 | 97.39 ± 0.28 | 73.09 ± 9.64* | 101.26 ± 8.07● | 81.93 ± 4.52○ |
| 30 | 100.75 ± 0.79 | 74.56 ± 8.91* | 109.3 ± 8.3● | 84.87 ± 6.25○ |
| 35 | 97.43 ± 0.71 | 77.74 ± 9.07* | 117.42 ± 8.28● | 88.37 ± 7.88○ |
| 40 | 101.31 ± 2.03 | 78.64 ± 9.21* | 123.41 ± 8.25● | 94.41 ± 9.1○ |
| 45 | 101.21 ± 2.24 | 82.11 ± 9.95 | 124.74 ± 8.46● | 98.82 ± 9.12○ |
| 50 | 100.03 ± 0.36 | 85.42 ± 10.75 | 126.96 ± 8.64● | 99.1 ± 8.44○ |
*P < 0.05, Control vs. Model; ●P < 0.05, Model vs. EA; ○P < 0.05, Cro + EA vs. EA.