| Literature DB >> 31897100 |
Kai Zhu1,2, Futing Zhao3, Yanhua Yang4, Weidong Mu1.
Abstract
Effects of simvastatin-loaded PLGA sustained release microspheres on the treatment of rats with intervertebral disk degeneration (IVDD) and on 6-keto-prostaglandin F1α (6-K-PGF1α) and hypoxia inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) were investigated. Eighty female rats were selected and randomized into a model group (modeled for IVDD), a treatment group (modeled and treated with simvastatin-loaded PLGA sustained release microspheres), a sham operation group (only operated without excision), and a control group (not treated) (n=20 each). After modeling, 6-K-PGF1α and HIF-1α in the peripheral blood of the rats were, respectively, detected before simvastatin injection (T0), at 2 weeks (T1) and 4 weeks (T2) after simvastatin injection. The bone mineral density (BMD) of L5 and L6 was detected by X-ray. The trabecular thickness, number, and separation of the vertebral body were detected. Changes in the sagittal T2-weighted signal of intervertebral disc nucleus pulposus were detected by MRI. There were no differences between the control and sham operation groups in the indices (P>0.050). Compared with those in the model group during the treatment, BMD, 6-K-PGF1α, HIF-1α, and trabecular number in the treatment group significantly increased (P<0.050), while the trabecular separation significantly decreased (P<0.050). The sagittal T2-weighted MRI signal in the model group was the lowest between the four groups (P<0.050). Simvastatin-loaded PLGA sustained release microspheres can improve the BMD of the vertebral body and increase the contents of 6-K-PGF1α and HIF-1α in the treatment of rats with IVDD, so they are important for the clinical treatment of the disease. Copyright: © Zhu et al.Entities:
Keywords: 6-K-PGF1α; HIF-1α; PLGA; bone mineral density; simvastatin
Year: 2019 PMID: 31897100 PMCID: PMC6923742 DOI: 10.3892/etm.2019.8267
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Exp Ther Med ISSN: 1792-0981 Impact factor: 2.447
Figure 1.A microsphere release curve.
Figure 2.Detection results of BMD. (A) Comparison of the BMD of L5 vertebral body between the four groups. (B) Comparison of the BMD of L6 vertebral body between the four groups. *P<0.050 when compared with BMD in the control group at the same time-point; #P<0.050 when compared with BMD in the sham operation group at the same time-point; &P<0.050 when compared with BMD in the model group at the same time-point; @P<0.050 when compared with BMD at T0 in the same group; $P<0.050 when compared with BMD at T1 in the same group.
Figure 3.Detection results of 6-K-PGF1α and HIF-1α. (A) Comparison of 6-K-PGF1α between the four groups. (B) Comparison of HIF-1α between the four groups. *P<0.050 when compared with that in the control group at the same time-point; #P<0.050 when compared with that in the sham operation group at the same time-point; &P<0.050 when compared with that in the model group at the same time-point; $P<0.050 when compared with that at T0 in the same group; @P<0.050 when compared with that at T1 in the same group.
Comparison of CT results.
| Control | Sham operation group | Model group | Treatment group | F-value | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Trabecular thickness (µm) | 105.52±4.28 | 101.52±3.15 | 103.62±3.42 | 103.57±4.16 | 0.933 | 0.448 |
| Trabecular number (mm) | 2.34±0.42 | 2.28±0.39 | 1.42±0.24[ | 1.83±0.25[ | 8.249 | 0.002 |
| Trabecular separation (µm) | 250.62±28.63 | 262.61±30.57 | 368.45±32.65[ | 316.74±25.61[ | 16.880 | <0.001 |
P<0.050 when compared with that in the control group
P<0.050 when compared with that in the sham operation group
P<0.050 when compared with that in the model group.
Figure 4.Comparison of sagittal T2-weighted MRI signal of intervertebral disc nucleus pulposus. *P<0.050 when compared with that in the control group; #P<0.050 when compared with that in the sham operation group; @P<0.050 when compared with that in the model group.