Yinan Yang1, Changwei Wei1, Jinhu Liu1, Danxu Ma1, Chao Xiong1,2, Dandan Lin1, Anshi Wu1. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Fu Wai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Postoperative neurocognitive disorder (PND) is a main complication that is commonly seen postoperatively in elderly patients. The underlying mechanism remains unclear, although neuroinflammation has been increasingly observed in PND. Atorvastatin is a pleiotropic agent with proven anti-inflammatory effects. In this study, we investigated the effects of atorvastatin on a PND mouse model after peripheral surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The mice were randomized into five groups. The PND models were established, and an open field test and fear condition test were performed. Hippocampal inflammatory cytokine expression was determined using ELISA. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) expression in the hippocampus was tested using qRT-PCR and western blot analysis. RESULTS: On day 1 after surgery, inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, and interleukin-6 showed a significant increase in the hippocampus, with prominent cognitive impairment. Atorvastatin treatment improved cognitive function in the mouse model, attenuated neuroinflammation, and increased PPARγ expression in the hippocampus. However, treatment with the PPARγ antagonist GW9662 partially reversed the protective effects of atorvastatin. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicated that atorvastatin improves several hippocampal functions and alleviates inflammation in PND mice after surgery, probably through a PPARγ-involved signaling pathway.
OBJECTIVE:Postoperative neurocognitive disorder (PND) is a main complication that is commonly seen postoperatively in elderly patients. The underlying mechanism remains unclear, although neuroinflammation has been increasingly observed in PND. Atorvastatin is a pleiotropic agent with proven anti-inflammatory effects. In this study, we investigated the effects of atorvastatin on a PND mouse model after peripheral surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The mice were randomized into five groups. The PND models were established, and an open field test and fear condition test were performed. Hippocampal inflammatory cytokine expression was determined using ELISA. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) expression in the hippocampus was tested using qRT-PCR and western blot analysis. RESULTS: On day 1 after surgery, inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-1β, and interleukin-6 showed a significant increase in the hippocampus, with prominent cognitive impairment. Atorvastatin treatment improved cognitive function in the mouse model, attenuated neuroinflammation, and increased PPARγ expression in the hippocampus. However, treatment with the PPARγ antagonist GW9662 partially reversed the protective effects of atorvastatin. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicated that atorvastatin improves several hippocampal functions and alleviates inflammation in PND mice after surgery, probably through a PPARγ-involved signaling pathway.
Postoperative neurocognitive disorder (PND) is a newly defined dysfunction that
comprises cognitive impairment and a decline in elderly patients after anesthesia
and surgery.[1] The incidence of PND is about 30% at 24 to 72 hours after undergoing major
non-cardiovascular surgery in patients aged over 65 years based on a recent Chinese study.[2] Currently, PND has become the focus of studies because of its clinical
consequences, although its precise mechanism remains unknown. Therefore,
investigating the pathophysiology and the underlying mechanism of PND might
contribute to delivering a more efficacious preventive and treatment strategy for
this cognitive disorder.Neuroinflammation plays a critical role in PND development and progression.[3] The enhanced inflammatory responses might cause a severe clinical impact on
the brain, including cognitive dysfunction. Based on an animal experiment, the
neuroinflammatory response showed a correlation with PND occurrence, which might
result from surgery-induced suppression of pro-inflammatory cytokines that attenuate
cognitive dysfunction.[4] Moreover, clinical studies have also demonstrated that the inflammatory
cytokine levels in PND patients after surgery were significantly higher compared
with those without PND.[5] Based on these results, we hypothesized that pharmacological inhibition of
neuroinflammation is important for treating and preventing postoperative cognitive
impairment.Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARγ) is a multifunctional nuclear
hormone receptor, which mainly focuses on regulation of inflammation, oxidative
metabolism, lipid metabolism, and glucose homeostasis.[6] Recent evidence indicated that PPARγ agonists alleviate and even prevent
neuroinflammatory responses.[7] This is supported by the results that PPARγ activators protect neurofunction
in a group of neurological degenerative disorders by regulating the inflammatory responses.[8]Statins are first-line lipid-lowering drugs and PPARγ agonists. Evidence has shown
that atorvastatin, which is the most widely used statin, exerts pleiotropic effects
by inhibiting cell proliferation, improving endothelial function, and reducing
inflammation by activating the PPARγ signaling pathway.[9] However, whether atorvastatin prevents or protects PND remains controversial.
Therefore, this animal study was designed to determine the effects of atorvastatin
on PND mouse models.
Material and methods
Animals
This study was approved by the animal ethics committee at Beijing Chao-Yang
Hospital, Capital Medical University, and was conducted in accordance with the
“Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” that was published by the
National Institutes of Health, to minimize animal suffering and the number of
animals used in the experiments.Male C57BL/6 mice (Vital River Laboratory Animal Technology Co. Ltd., Beijing,
China) aged 28 to 30 weeks and weighing 30 to 38 g were chosen for this study.
The animals were maintained at room temperature at 25°C at a relative humidity
of 55% under a 12-hour:12-hour light–dark cycle with free access to food and
water. The animals were randomly assigned to one of the following five groups
(n = 8 mice per group): group A was the sham-operated group (negative control);
group B was the PND group; group C was the atorvastatin-treated sham-operated
group; group D was the PND group with atorvastatin treatment; and group E was
the PND group with atorvastatin and GW9662 treatment.
Reagents and PND model
The mice in groups A and C were given placebo (0.3 mL of 0.9% saline), and mice
in groups B, D, and E received 400 μg of atorvastatin (Pfizer, New York, NY,
USA) in 0.3 mL of 0.9% saline that was administered for 7 consecutive days by
gavage. A PPARγ antagonist GW9662 (Cayman Chemical, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) was
dissolved in 50% dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and then diluted in saline (final
concentration of DMSO: 0.5%), and it was intraperitoneally administered at a
dose of 2 mg/kg to mice in group E. The atorvastatin dose of 10 mg/kg was chosen
for short-term treatment, which triggered robust anti-inflammatory activity at
this dose.[10] The mice in groups B, D, and E underwent orthopedic surgery, while those
in groups A and C underwent a sham operation. All mice in the groups underwent
two behavioral tests (open field test [OFT] and fear condition test [FCT]) on
day 1 after surgery or sham operation. After euthanasia, hippocampal tissue was
removed and immediately stored in liquid nitrogen at −80°C for further
examination.The PND models were created based on our previous report.[11] Briefly, mice in groups B, D, and E were anesthetized initially with 2%
isoflurane (Baxter International, Inc., Deerfield, IL, USA) to induce
anesthesia, followed by 1.5% isoflurane (Baxter International, Inc.) for
anesthesia maintenance. After disinfecting the left hind paws three times using
povidone–iodine, a longitudinal incision was made using a scalpel on each paw.
Following each incision, a 0.38-mm pin was inserted at the tibial medullary
canal. After the periosteum was stripped, osteotomy and irrigation were
performed, and the wound was closed using 4-0 nylon sutures after injecting
0.25% ropivacaine subcutaneously (Astra Zeneca, Wilmington, DE, USA). For
sham-operated mice in groups A and C, the procedure was conducted as described
above but the pin was not inserted into the tibia. The body temperature of the
mice was maintained at 37.0°C using a heating pad. The mice were allowed to
naturally awaken in an incubator at 37.0°C, and they were then returned to their
cages. At the end of the experiment, all mice were deeply anesthetized with
isoflurane and euthanized by transcardial perfusion with normal saline.
Hippocampal tissues were separated and stored at −80°C for further
detection.
Behavioral tests: OFT and FCT
The OFT was used to evaluate the locomotor activities and anxiety of the
experimental mice.[12] On day 1 after surgery, the mice were directly each placed in the center
of an open field (50 cm × 50 cm × 38 cm, length × width × height). The movements
of each mouse were then recorded using a digital camera during a 5-minute
testing session. The general locomotor activity (the total distance that the
mouse moved in an open field), number of rearings (frequency that the mouse
stood on its hind legs in the open field), and center square duration (the time
spent by each mouse in the central square) were recorded.The FCT has been extensively used to determine the surgical effects on the memory
of experimental mice.[13] Briefly, all the mice underwent FCT training 1 day before the surgery.
After a 3-minute exploration period, three pairs of sound stimuli (2000 Hz and
90 Db for 30 seconds each) and electric shock stimuli (1 mA, 2 seconds) were
given to the mice. The interval between the two pairs of stimuli was 1 minute.
On day 1 after the surgery, a context test and a cue test were conducted for
each mouse. The mice that underwent the context test were placed in the same
context as the pre-surgical training for a 5-minute observation period without
stimulation by sound or electric shock, and the freezing times (the time of
immobility that small rodents tend to present when faced with fear) for the mice
were recorded. After finishing the 2-hour context test, the cue test was
performed. After a 3-minute exploration period, the mice underwent sound stimuli
(2000 Hz and 90 Db for 30 seconds each) without an electric shock stimulus, and
the freezing times of mice for the cue test were recorded. A camera-based
monitoring system (XeyeFcs System, Beijing Macro Ambition S&T Development
Co., Ltd., Beijing, China) was used to automatically record and calculate the
freezing times of the mice when conducting these tests.
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
After completing the behavioral tests, the mice were sacrificed as described
above, and the hippocampal tissues were separated, homogenized, and stored at
−80°C before use. Next, protein quantification was conducted using bicinchoninic
acid (BCA) assay (Thermo Scientific, Rockford, IL, USA). The hippocampal
proinflammatory cytokine levels, including interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1β, and tumor
necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were determined using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assay (ELISA) kit (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA). The inflammatory
mediators in the tissue were expressed as ng/g of tissue. A spectrophotometer
was used to measure the color intensity by absorbance at a wavelength of 495 nm.
The sensitivity applied in this study was 0.05 pg/mL.
In accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions, total RNA from all the
hippocampal tissues was extracted using Trizol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad,
CA, USA). A reverse-transcription reaction was conducted to generate cDNA
(PrimeScript® RT reagent kit, Takara Biotechnology [Dalian] Ltd., Dalian,
China). The primers, which were designed using Primer 5.0 software (PREMIER
Biosoft International, San Francisco, CA, USA), were as follows:MousePPARγ, Forward: 5ʹ-GAGTAGCCTGGGCTGCTTTT-3′;Reverse: 5ʹ-ATAATAAGGCGGGGACGCAG-3′;Mouse β-actin, Forward: 5ʹ-AGAGGGAAATCGTGCGTGAC-3′;Reverse: 5ʹ-CAGGAAGGAAGGCTGGAAG-3′.Quantitative real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reactions
(qRT-PCRs) with SYBR Green detection for PPARγ and β-actin gene expression were
used (SYBR® Premix Ex Taq™ II, Takara Biotechnology [Dalian] Ltd.) on an ABI
7500 RT-PCR System (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The Ct method
was used to analyze the results by calculating 2-ΔΔCt using the following
formula: ΔCt = target gene Ct value −glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase
(GAPDH) Ct value and ΔΔCt = ΔCt treatment − ΔCt control.
Western blot analyses
On day 1 after surgery, the mouse hippocampal tissues were separated,
homogenized, and stored at −80°C before use. Protein quantification was
conducted using a BCA assay (Thermo Scientific, Rockford, IL, USA). The
collected protein samples were separated with sodium
dodecylsulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. The gel was then transferred
into a polyvinylidene fluoride membrane and incubated with an anti-PPARγ primary
antibody (1:1000, Abcam Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA) overnight. Based on the
individual experiments, anti-β actin (1:1000, Abcam Inc.) antibodies were used
as loading controls. The goat anti-rabbit/anti-mousehorseradish
peroxidase-conjugated IgG was added as a secondary antibody (1:2500, Zhongshan
Goldenbridge Inc., Beijing, China) and incubated for 1 hour at room temperature.
An enhanced chemiluminescence kit (Thermo Scientific, Rockford, IL, USA) was
used to test the target proteins in accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions. The pictures were then obtained, and the gray values for each
target protein were analyzed using an Alpha EaseFC imaging system (Alpha
Innotech, San Leandro, CA, USA).
Statistical analysis
The results are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) and analyzed
using SPSS Statistics for Windows version 20.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY,
USA). The values of multiple groups were compared using a one-way analysis of
variance (ANOVA). The Fisher’s least significant difference test was used for
two-way comparisons. A p value of less than 0.05 was considered
to be statistically significant.
Results
Behavioral assessment
To determine if major surgery impairs cognitive function, behavioral assessment
with FCT and OFT was performed in adult mice after surgery.For the OFT test, there were no differences in the total distance traveled, time
spent at the center of the arena, or the number of rearings among the groups
(Figure 1).
Figure 1.
Open field test of mice in each group. The general locomotor activity
(mm), number of rearings, and center square duration (s) were counted,
respectively.
Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND +atorvastatin + GW9662.
PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder.
Open field test of mice in each group. The general locomotor activity
(mm), number of rearings, and center square duration (s) were counted,
respectively.Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND +atorvastatin + GW9662.PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder.For the FCT test, the freezing time for the context test on day 1 after surgery
showed no significant differences (Figure 2a). In the cue test, the freezing
time of PND mice in group B was significantly shorter compared with the
sham-operated mice in group A (Figure 2b, p < 0.01). Compared with group B, the freezing time
was significantly increased after treatment with atorvastatin in group D (Figure 2b, p < 0.05),
and a significant down-regulation was observed after adding GW9662 (group E)
(Figure 2b,
p < 0.05).
Figure 2.
Fear condition test of mice in each group.
a. The freezing time that was recorded from the context test in each
group; b. The freezing time that was recorded from the cue test in each
group.
Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.
PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder.
Fear condition test of mice in each group.a. The freezing time that was recorded from the context test in each
group; b. The freezing time that was recorded from the cue test in each
group.Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder.These findings indicate that atorvastatin preserved learning and memory after
surgery, and that atorvastatin protects against orthopedic surgery-induced
cognitive impairment on day 1 after surgery in mice.
Analysis of inflammatory cytokines: IL-6, IL-1β, and TNF-α
As shown in Figure 3,
IL-6, IL-1β, and TNF-α levels showed a significant increase in group B compared
with group A (p < 0.01). After administering atorvastatin (group C) in the
normal mice, no significant difference was observed in IL-6, IL-1β, and TNF-α
levels in the hippocampal brain tissue compared with group A. Compared with
group B, IL-6, IL-1β, and TNF-α levels were markedly down-regulated after
atorvastatin injection (group D). After treatment with GW9662 (group E), an
up-regulated trend was observed in all the detected inflammatory cytokines
compared with group B, but only TNF-α showed a statistical significance (Figure 3c,
p < 0.05).
Figure 3.
Expression levels of IL-6 (a) and IL-1β (b) and TNF-α (c) in the
hippocampal brain tissue of each group. One-way ANOVA was used for data
analysis, and the error line represents the SD.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.
Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND +atorvastatin + GW9662.
PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; IL-6, interleukin-2; IL-1β,
interleukin-1β; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; ANOVA, analysis of
variance; SD, standard deviation.
Expression levels of IL-6 (a) and IL-1β (b) and TNF-α (c) in the
hippocampal brain tissue of each group. One-way ANOVA was used for data
analysis, and the error line represents the SD.*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND +atorvastatin + GW9662.PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; IL-6, interleukin-2; IL-1β,
interleukin-1β; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; ANOVA, analysis of
variance; SD, standard deviation.
Results of qRT-PCR analysis
To study the correlation between the PND model group and PPARγ expression, animal
modeling was conducted at the mouse level, and PPARγ mRNA expression was
detected using qRT-PCR.As shown in Figure 4,
PPARγ mRNA expression in group B was significantly lower compared with group A
(p < 0.01). After treating normal mice with atorvastatin (group C), a
significant difference was observed in the PPARγ mRNA level in the hippocampal
brain tissue compared with group A (p < 0.05). Compared with group B, the
PPARγ mRNA level was significantly up-regulated after atorvastatin treatment
(group D, p < 0.01), and significantly down-regulated after adding GW9662
(group E, p < 0.01).
Figure 4.
PPARγ mRNA expression levels in hippocampal brain tissue in each group.
One-way ANOVA was used for data analysis, and the error line represents
SD. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.
Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.
PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; PPARγ, peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor-gamma; ANOVA, analysis of variance; SD,
standard deviation.
PPARγ mRNA expression levels in hippocampal brain tissue in each group.
One-way ANOVA was used for data analysis, and the error line represents
SD. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, respectively.Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; PPARγ, peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor-gamma; ANOVA, analysis of variance; SD,
standard deviation.
Results of western blot analysis
To further explore the correlation between PPAR and PND and mouse hippocampal
inflammatory signaling pathways, western blotting was conducted to detect the
molecular mechanism of atorvastatin in the hippocampal tissues of mice in each
group.As shown in Figure 5, the
PPARγ mRNA expression level was consistent with that of the PPARγ protein level
in group B, but it was significantly lower compared with group A (p < 0.01).
After treating normal mice with atorvastatin, PPARγ protein levels were
increased in the hippocampal brain tissue in group C compared with group A
(p < 0.05). Compared with group B, PPARγ protein levels showed significant
up-regulation after atorvastatin treatment (group D, p < 0.01), and
significant down-regulation after adding GW9662 (group E, p < 0.01).
Figure 5.
PPARγ protein expression levels in the hippocampal brain tissues of each
group. One-way ANOVA was used for data analysis, and the error line
represents SD. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, respectively.
Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.
PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; PPARγ, peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor-gamma; ANOVA, analysis of variance; SD,
standard deviation.
PPARγ protein expression levels in the hippocampal brain tissues of each
group. One-way ANOVA was used for data analysis, and the error line
represents SD. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, respectively.Group A: Sham, group B: PND, group C: Atorvastatin, group D:
PND + atorvatastin, group E: PND + atorvastatin + GW9662.PND, postoperative neurocognitive disorder; PPARγ, peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor-gamma; ANOVA, analysis of variance; SD,
standard deviation.
Discussion
In this study, our results demonstrated that atorvastatin treatment before surgery
exerted a prominent protective effect from cognitive dysfunction after surgery in a
mouse model. Consistent with the neurofunctional improvement, there was also a
significant reduction in the levels of inflammatory factors such as IL-6, IL-1β, and
TNF-α in the hippocampus, which is probably mediated by atorvastatin-induced
upregulation of PPARγ.In the OFT test, all mice in the groups showed no differences in general locomotor
activity, center square duration, or number of rearings, which suggests that neither
the orthopedic surgery nor atorvastatin administration affected the locomotor
function and anxiety in the tested mice. After OFT, FCT including the context and
cue tests was performed. The aim of FCT was to investigate the ability of mice to
learn an associative memory between environmental cues and adverse experiences such
as electric shock, which has become a standard way to assess hippocampal-dependent
learning and memory in PND models.[14] The freezing time was shorter in the PND group compared with the
sham-operated group in the context test, which indicated that the mice in the PND
group had learning and memory dysfunctions after surgery. Moreover, atorvastatin
prolonged the freezing time of mice in the atorvastatin-treated group compared with
the PND group, and this effect could be blocked by a PPARγ antagonist, which
suggested that atorvastatin likely improved the cognitive function in mice through
PPARγ regulation.In the current study, proinflammatory factor levels (IL-6, IL-1β, and TNF-α) were
prominently increased in the hippocampus on day 1 post-operation with a gross
cognitive inhibition, suggesting that an acute elevation of cytokines might trigger
a significant influence on the cognitive function. Atorvastatin prevents
inflammation in the hippocampus in a variety of animal studies.[15,16] Our results
also confirmed that atorvastatin administration significantly alleviated hippocampal
inflammation in mice. Although the precise mechanisms of its metabolism in the brain
remains to be investigated, atorvastatin is easily transferred from the blood–brain
barrier and penetrated deep into the phospholipid bilayer of cell membranes of the
neurons, indicating the underlying mechanism of this agent in brain protection. The
PPARγ antagonist GW9662 (i.e., in the GW9662-treated group), showed a significant
reversal in only the TNF-α level, but not in IL-6 and IL-1β levels compared with the
atorvastatin-treated group. This finding might suggest a complexity in regulating
hippocampal inflammation because previous reports have indicated the involvement of
other signaling pathways such as nuclear factor (NF)-κB[17] or MAPK[18] in neuronal inflammatory responses.Our results also suggested that decreased hippocampal PPARγ might be a mechanism that
is involved in neuroinflammation and subsequent cognitive dysfunction in this animal
PND model. Specifically, atorvastatin administration, a PPARγ agonist, inhibited
neuroinflammation and repaired cognitive function after surgery. Moreover, a PPARγ
antagonist, GW9662, partially blocked the protective effect of atorvastatin.
Therefore, we speculated that the preventive effects of atorvastatin in this study
mainly occur through the PPARγ receptor.PPARγ is the most extensively studied isoform of the PPAR family, and it has
promising neuroprotective effects in various animal models of neurodysfunction.
PPARγ agonists such as atorvastatin or pioglitazone are widely used in clinical
medicine and animal studies. In an animal model of Parkinson’s disease, PPARγ
agonists are shown to attenuate neuroinflammation, and improve memory and learning functions.[19] Additionally, the PPARγ activation reduces the inflammatory response in
autoimmune encephalomyelitis animal models, improving the clinical severity of this disease.[20] However, neuroinflammation worsened when PPARγ expression was reduced in a
seipin knockout mouse model.[21] Consistent with these findings, our study demonstrated that surgery induced a
gross decrease in hippocampal PPARγ expression, which was consistent with recent
findings of PPARγ changes after PND.[7] Because the PPARγ antagonist GW9662 counteracts the protective effects of
atorvastatin, the PPARγ receptor was considered to be a therapeutic target for
PND.There are several limitations in this study. First, the mouse models do not
completely mimic the behavioral impairment of PND such as delirium or language
dysfunctions in humans. Therefore, whether PPARγ activation improves these disorders
remains unknown. Second, although PPARγ activation induces anti-inflammatory effects
in the brain, as shown in our study and other studies[8,22] that investigated
neuro-dysfunction, our results showed a trend toward a protective effect of
atorvastatin on inflammatory factors from circulatory immune cells, which may be
because PPARγ receptors are also expressed in monocytes and macrophages. Moreover,
additional unknown mechanisms might be involved in cognitive protection by
atorvastatin, expect for PPARγ. Therefore, further studies are required to more
fully understanding the precise mechanisms of atorvastatin and its associated PPARγ
expression and activation in PND.In conclusion, the current study indicated that atorvastatin prevented cognitive
dysfunction and alleviated several inflammatory responses in a mouse model of PND,
which may occur via activation of the hippocampal PPARγ signaling pathway. Our study
provided evidence that atorvastatin and its associated PPARγ activation might induce
supplementary prevention and represent a therapeutic target for PND.
Authors: Débora C Souza-Costa; Valéria C Sandrim; Lívia F Lopes; Raquel F Gerlach; Eduardo M Rego; Jose E Tanus-Santos Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2006-08-30 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Rachael M Clarke; Anthony Lyons; Florence O'Connell; Brian F Deighan; Claire E Barry; Ngozi G Anyakoha; Anna Nicolaou; Marina A Lynch Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2007-11-02 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Rossana R Porto; Fabrício D Dutra; Ana Paula Crestani; R M Damian Holsinger; Jorge A Quillfeldt; Paulo Ivo Homem de Bittencourt; Lucas de Oliveira Alvares Journal: Neuroscience Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 3.590
Authors: Rita Barone; Renata Rizzo; Giovanni Tabbì; Michele Malaguarnera; Richard E Frye; Jean Bastin Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Changkeun Im; Hyeongi Kim; Javeria Zaheer; Jung Young Kim; Yong-Jin Lee; Choong Mo Kang; Jin Su Kim Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-07-02 Impact factor: 10.057