Effects of exercise training on neurological recovery, TGF-β1, HIF-1α, and Nogo-NgR signaling pathways after spinal cord injury in rats

Ji, Xubin; Xu, Zhaowan; Liu, Dayong; Chen, Yangwang

doi:10.1016/j.clinsp.2023.100236

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original articles • Clinics 78 • 2023 • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinsp.2023.100236 copy

Effects of exercise training on neurological recovery, TGF-β1, HIF-1α, and Nogo-NgR signaling pathways after spinal cord injury in rats

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Highlights

Exercise training can enhance motor function and improve the spinal cord.
Exercise training can improve gastrocnemius muscle morphology.
Exercise training can promote neurological recovery after spinal cord injury in rats.

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effects of exercise training on neurological recovery, Growth Transforming Factor-β1 (TGF-β1), Hypoxia Inducible Factor-1α (HIF-1α), and Nogo-NgR signaling pathways after spinal cord injury in rats.

Methods

Forty-eight male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into four groups: normal group, sham-operated group, model group, and training group. The rat spinal cord injury model was established using Allen's method, and the training group received exercise training on the 8th day postoperatively. The Basso, Beattie and Bresnahan (BBB) score, modified Tarlow score, and inclined plane test scores were compared in each group before injury and 1, 7, 14, 21 and 28 days after injury.

Results

The BBB score and modified Tarlow score of the model group and the training group were 0 at the first day after the injury, and gradually increased on the seventh day onwards (p < 0.05). The BBB score and modified Tarlow score of the training group were higher than those of the model group at the 14th, 21st and 28th day (p < 0.05). The angles of the inclined plate at multiple time points after injury were lower in the model group and the training group than in the normal group and the sham-operated group (p < 0.05); The angles of the inclined plate at the 14th, 21st and 28th day after injury were higher in the training group than in the model group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The mechanism of exercise training may be connected to the inhibition of the Nogo-NgR signaling pathway to promote neuronal growth.

Keywords
Spinal cord injury; Motor training; Neurological function; TGF-β1; HIF-1α

Group	Pre-injury	Post-injury
Group	Pre-injury	1st d	7th d	14th d	21st d	28th d
Normal group	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00
Sham-operated group	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00	21.00±0.00
Model group	21.00±0.00	0.00±0.00^b b p < 0.001.	3.86±0.84^b b p < 0.001.	5.86±1.15^b b p < 0.001.	10.53±3.32^b b p < 0.001.	13.36±4.11^b b p < 0.001.
Training group	21.00±0.00	0.00±0.00^b b p < 0.001.	3.69±0.62^b b p < 0.001.	10.63±2.14^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	14.62±4.84^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	17.32±3.32^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.

Group	Pre-injury	Post-injury
Group	Pre-injury	1st d	7th d	14th d	21st d	28th d
Normal group	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00
Sham-operated group	5.00±0.00	4.89±0.08	4.98±0.02	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00	5.00±0.00
Model group	5.00±0.00	0.00±0.00^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	1.05±0.21^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	2.21±0.42^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	2.54±0.41^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	2.96±0.42^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.
Training group	5.00±0.00	0.00±0.00^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	1.14±0.19^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	2.96±0.37^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	3.34±0.52^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	4.02±0.39^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.

Group	Pre-injury	Post-injury
Group	Pre-injury	1st d	7th d	14th d	21st d	28th d
Normal group	42.52±2.55	41.63±2.41	42.53±3.02	43.16±3.42	42.74±4.02	42.63±3.96
Sham-operated group	42.48±2.34	42.02±3.32	42.41±2.98	42.54±3.41	43.11±4.16	41.59±4.12
Model group	41.89±2.48	15.63±2.24^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	20.32±3.32^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	26.32±4.52^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	30.26±5.52^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	34.86±3.38^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.
Training group	42.03±2.51	16.03±3.32^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	21.36±3.54^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	30.68±5.52^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.05.	35.69±6.32^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.05.	39.63±5.12^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.05.

Group	Myofiber cross-sectional area (μm²)	Myofiber diameter (μm)
Normal group	55.46±10.19	8.99±1.11
Sham-operated group	54.63±9.65	8.86±0.85
Model group	35.62±8.45^b b p < 0.001; compared with model group.	6.03±1.15^b b p < 0.001; compared with model group.
Training group	42.53±7.11^a a p < 0.01. ,^c c p < 0.05.	7.53±1.43^a a p < 0.01. ,^d d p < 0.01.

Group	MAP1B	NSE	VIM
Normal group	5.63±0.74	5.56±0.82	5.15±0.73
Sham-operated group	5.58±0.72	5.39±0.75	5.21±0.69
Model group	3.38±0.57^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	3.46±0.62^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.	3.29±0.54^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group.
Training group	4.78±0.63^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	4.53±0.52^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.	4.56±0.63^a a p < 0.001; compared with model group. ,^b b p < 0.001.

Faculdade de Medicina / USP Rua Dr Ovídio Pires de Campos, 225 - 6 and., 05403-010 São Paulo SP - Brazil, Tel.: (55 11) 2661-6235 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: clinics@hc.fm.usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author. E-mail address:chenyangwang092@163.com (Y. Chen).