| Title |
The attenuation of neurological injury from the use of simvastatin after spinal cord ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Anesthesiology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12871-018-0496-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jung-Hee Ryu, Jin-woo Park, Jin-Young Hwang, Seong-Joo Park, Jin-Hee Kim, Hye-Min Sohn, Sung Hee Han |
| Abstract |
Spinal cord ischemic injury remains a serious complication of open surgical and endovascular aortic procedures. Simvastatin has been reported to be associated with neuroprotective effect after spinal cord ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury. The aim of this study was to determine the therapeutic efficacy of starting simvastatin after spinal cord IR injury in a rat model. In adult Sprague-Dawley rats, spinal cord ischemia was induced using a balloon-tipped catheter placed in the descending thoracic aorta. The animals were then randomly divided into 4 groups: group A (control); group B (0.5 mg/kg simvastatin); group C (1 mg/kg simvastatin); and group D (10 mg/kg simvastatin). Simvastatin was administered orally upon reperfusion for 5 days. Neurological function of the hind limbs was evaluated for 7 days after reperfusion and recorded using a motor deficit score (MDS) (0: normal, 5: complete paraplegia). The number of normal motor neurons within the anterior horns of the spinal cord was counted after final MDS evaluation. Then, the spinal cord was harvested for histopathological examination. Group D showed a significantly lower MDS than the other groups at post-reperfusion day 1 and this trend was sustained throughout the study period. Additionally, a greater number of normal motor neurons was observed in group D than in other groups (group D 21.2 [3.2] vs. group A: 15.8 [4.2]; group B 15.4 [3.4]; and group C 15.5 [3.7]; P = 0.002). The results of the current study suggest that 10 mg/kg can significantly improve neurologic outcome by attenuating neurologic injury and restoring normal motor neurons after spinal cord IR injury. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Japan | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 60% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 33% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 60% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#13,584,037
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#443
of 1,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,822
of 330,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#14
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,510 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.