| Literature DB >> 35783515 |
Ting Yu1, Xiaofeng Xie2,3, Huixia Wei2, Qiuxin Wu2,3, Xiuyan Zhang2,3, Qingmei Tian2,3, Jike Song1,3, Hongsheng Bi2,3.
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this paper was to study the effect of electroacupuncture (EA) on choroidal blood flow (ChBF) in a guinea pig model of lens-induced myopia (LIM).Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35783515 PMCID: PMC9249499 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3286583
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.650
Figure 1Lens-induced myopia and EA treatment experiment. (a) Lenses were mounted onto a self-made frame using surgical tapes and glued onto the right eyes of guinea pigs. (b) The guinea pigs were treated with EA stimulation. (c) The point location of acupuncture treatment (red circle).
The refraction, AL, ACD, LT, and VCD in right eyes in groups.
| Weeks | Groups | Right eyes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refraction (D) | ACD (mm) | LT (mm) | VCD (mm) | AL (mm) | ||
| 0 weeks | NC | 3.05 ± 0.42 | 1.18 ± 0.03 | 3.34 ± 0.03 | 3.45 ± 0.03 | 7.97 ± 0.03 |
| LIM | 3.03 ± 0.51 | 1.18 ± 0.03 | 3.35 ± 0.04 | 3.44 ± 0.03 | 7.96 ± 0.03 | |
| LIM + LA | 3.03 ± 0.49 | 1.19 ± 0.02 | 3.33 ± 0.03 | 3.45 ± 0.03 | 7.98 ± 0.04 | |
| LIM + sham | 3.05 ± 0.51 | 1.18 ± 0.02 | 3.34 ± 0.03 | 3.45 ± 0.02 | 7.97 ± 0.03 | |
|
| ||||||
| 2 weeks | NC | 2.2 ± 0.48 | 1.26 ± 0.03 | 3.48 ± 0.07 | 3.48 ± 0.06 | 8.22 ± 0.03 |
| LIM | −4.23 ± 0.43 | 1.25 ± 0.03 | 3.55 ± 0.05 | 3.56 ± 0.04∗∗ | 8.36 ± 0.05 | |
| LIM + LA | −3.63 ± 0.49## | 1.23 ± 0.05 | 3.54 ± 0.07 | 3.54 ± 0.04 | 8.32 ± 0.03# | |
| LIM + sham | −4.30 ± 0.51 | 1.24 ± 0.03 | 3.55 ± 0.04 | 3.57 ± 0.05 | 8.36 ± 0.04 | |
|
| ||||||
| 4 weeks | NC | 1.63 ± 0.41 | 1.25 ± 0.01 | 3.57 ± 0.05 | 3.58 ± 0.03 | 8.40 ± 0.04 |
| LIM | −5.88 ± 0.49 | 1.26 ± 0.05 | 3.65 ± 0.06∗∗ | 3.66 ± 0.04 | 8.57 ± 0.06 | |
| LIM + LA | −2.55 ± 0.48### | 1.24 ± 0.03 | 3.63 ± 0.05 | 3.64 ± 0.05 | 8.51 ± 0.03# | |
| LIM + sham | −5.78 ± 0.49 | 1.25 ± 0.02 | 3.65 ± 0.07 | 3.66 ± 0.05 | 8.57 ± 0.07 | |
+ P < 0.001, LIM vs. LIM fellow; P < 0.05, NC vs. LIM; ∗∗P < 0.01, NC vs. LIM; P < 0.001, NC vs. LIM; #P < 0.05, LIM vs. LIM + EA; ###P < 0.001, LIM vs. LIM + EA.
The refraction, AL, ACD, LT, and VCD in left eyes in groups.
| Weeks | Groups | Left eyes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Refraction (D) | ACD (mm) | LT (mm) | VCD (mm) | AL (mm) | ||
| 0 weeks | NC | 3.05 ± 0.48 | 1.19 ± 0.04 | 3.33 ± 0.02 | 3.45 ± 0.04 | 7.97 ± 0.05 |
| LIM | 3.05 ± 0.54 | 1.19 ± 0.04 | 3.34 ± 0.06 | 3.42 ± 0.05 | 7.96 ± 0.05 | |
| LIM + LA | 3.03 ± 0.58 | 1.19 ± 0.04 | 3.35 ± 0.04 | 3.43 ± 0.05 | 7.97 ± 0.04 | |
| LIM + sham | 3.10 ± 0.49 | 1.19 ± 0.03 | 3.36 ± 0.05 | 3.44 ± 0.06 | 7.98 ± 0.05 | |
|
| ||||||
| 2 weeks | NC | 2.10 ± 0.43 | 1.27 ± 0.03 | 3.49 ± 0.06 | 3.47 ± 0.02 | 8.23 ± 0.02 |
| LIM | 2.23 ± 0.53 | 1.27 ± 0.04 | 3.51 ± 0.06 | 3.46 ± 0.04 | 8.24 ± 0.03 | |
| LIM + LA | 2.23 ± 0.56 | 1.26 ± 0.03 | 3.50 ± 0.06 | 3.47 ± 0.06 | 8.22 ± 0.02 | |
| LIM + sham | 2.28 ± 0.52 | 1.27 ± 0.03 | 3.50 ± 0.05 | 3.49 ± 0.07 | 8.23 ± 0.02 | |
|
| ||||||
| 4 weeks | NC | 1.75 ± 0.24 | 1.25 ± 0.02 | 3.59 ± 0.07 | 3.56 ± 0.04 | 8.40 ± 0.05 |
| LIM | 1.63 ± 0.50 | 1.25 ± 0.03 | 3.59 ± 0.05 | 3.58 ± 0.04 | 8.41 ± 0.04 | |
| LIM + LA | 1.73 ± 0.46 | 1.25 ± 0.04 | 3.58 ± 0.06 | 3.57 ± 0.04 | 8.41 ± 0.05 | |
| LIM + sham | 1.65 ± 0.36 | 1.27 ± 0.04 | 3.60 ± 0.05 | 3.56 ± 0.05 | 8.42 ± 0.06 | |
Figure 2Comparison of ChT, vessel density of CC, and vessel density of choroidal layer changes in the NC, LIM, LIM + EA, and LIM + sham group and collagen fibril diameter taken from representative electron micrographs (x25000) of the right eyes in four groups. (a) Comparison of ChT in four groups. (b) Comparison of vessel density of CC in four groups. (c) Comparison of vessel density of choroidal layer in four groups. (d) The scleral collagen fibril in NC group. (e) The scleral collagen fibril in LIM + EA group. (f) The scleral collagen fibril in LIM group. (g) The scleral collagen fibril in LIM + sham group. (d1) The corresponding distribution of the diameter of collagen fibrils in NC group. (e1) The corresponding distribution of the diameter of collagen fibrils in LIM + EA group. (f1) The corresponding distribution of the diameter of collagen fibrils in LIM group. (g1) The corresponding distribution of the diameter of collagen fibrils in LIM + sham group. P < 0.05, P < 0.01, P < 0.001.
Figure 3Changes in the HIF-1α, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 mRNA and protein expression during myopia development. (a) The mRNA level of HIF-1α. (b) The mRNA level of MMP-2. (c) The mRNA level of TIMP-2. (d) The protein levels of HIF-1α. (e) The protein level of MMP-2. (f) The protein level of TIMP-2. P < 0.05, P < 0.01, P < 0.001.