|
Objective To compare the BMSCs and EPCs cell co-transplantation of BMSCs or EPCs alone transplantation therapeutic effects on ischemic brain damage, to investigate cell transplantation on the role and mechanism of nerve function after repair in ischemic brain injury in rats. The method of using bone marrow culture method and cells cultured of BMSCs adherent method by density gradient centrifugation and adherent cells were obtained by EPCs. The suture method SD rat cerebral artery occlusion model (MCAO) (n = 80), according to the neurological score were randomly divided into model control group (n = 16), PBS control group (n = 16), BMSCs transplantation group (n = 16) and the EPCs transplantation group (n = 16) and cell transplantation group (n = 16). 2h after ischemia reperfusion 24h, by side carotid artery ischemia were injected with 2 × 10 6 of BMSCs, 2 × 10 6EPCs, an equal volume of 2 × 10 ~ 6BMSCs and 2 × 10 ~ 6EPCs equal volume of PBS solution BMSCs transplantation group, EPCs transplantation group, cells combined transplantation group, the PBS the control group; model control group received no treatment. Another sham group (n = 8). Intervention after 4 weeks of treatment to evaluate neurological function score, observed cell morphology, the observed cerebral infarct volume and infarct border zone BDNF expression. Results neurological score: sham group and normal SD rats difference no significant meaning, model control group, PBS control group, BMSCs transplantation group, EPCs transplantation group, the cell transplantation group score followed by 3.56 ± 0.37 points, 3.71 ± 0.18 points, 2.34 ± 0.10, 2.41 ± 0.06, 1.12 ± 0.29 points. Cell transplantation group and model control group, PBS control group were compared the difference was statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). Cell transplantation group with other groups differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). Infarct volume: model control group, PBS control group, BMSCs transplantation group, EPCs transplantation group, cell transplantation group volume of cerebral infarction followed by 199.38 ± 15.67 mm to 3,192.12 ± 17.63mm to 3,141.00 ± 12.51 mm ~~ 3,108.12 ± 9.54mm ~ 3,84.75 ± 12.85 mm ~ 3. Cell transplantation group and model control group, PBS control group were compared the difference was statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). Cell transplantation group with other groups differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). EPCs transplant group compared with BMSCs transplantation group difference was also significant (P lt; 0.05). Infarct border zone BDNF expression: model control group, PBS control group, BMSCs transplantation group, EPCs transplantation group, cell transplantation group infarct border zone BDNF expression in order (a positive cells / field): 3.51 ± 0.54,5.10 ± 0.39,32.46 ± 3.11,16.32 ± 2.84,58.69 ± 8.37. Cell transplantation group and model control group, PBS control group were compared the difference was statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). Cell transplantation group and other groups differences were statistically significant (P lt; 0.05). BMSCs transplantation group and EPCs transplantation group difference also was significant (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion BMSCs and EPCs co-transplantation treatment of ischemic brain injury more effective than the BMSCs or EPCs single cell transplantation. , BMSCs and EPCs United of transplantation therapy can promote the repair of ischemic brain damage nerve function, its mechanism of action may be: the one hand BMSCs transplantation increased brain BDNF autocrine or paracrine brain cells involved in the ischemic area regeneration; other hand EPCs transplantation promote angiogenesis in infarcted area, improve the blood supply of the ischemic area.
|