Skip Navigation

Brain 2007 130(4):970-984; doi:10.1093/brain/awm040
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Toft, A.
Right arrow Articles by Riddell, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Toft, A.
Right arrow Articles by Riddell, J. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2007). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Electrophysiological evidence that olfactory cell transplants improve function after spinal cord injury

Andrew Toft1, Dugald T. Scott1, Susan C. Barnett2 and John S. Riddell1

1Division of Neuroscience and Biomedical Systems, Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, and 2Division of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Glasgow, Beatson Laboratories, Glasgow, UK

Correspondence to: Dr John S. Riddell, Division of Neuroscience and Biomedical Systems, Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, West Medical Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK E-mail: j.riddell{at}bio.gla.ac.uk

Transplants of cells obtained from the olfactory system are a potential treatment for spinal cord injury and a number of clinical trials are in progress. However, the extent to which transplants improve recovery of function remains unclear and there are contradictory reports on the extent to which they support axonal regeneration. Here, we have used anatomical and electrophysiological techniques to investigate the repair promoted by olfactory cell transplants after a dorsal column lesion. Since the use of olfactory cells of varying type and origin may contribute to the differing outcomes of previous studies, regeneration of dorsal column axons was compared following transplants of pure olfactory ensheathing cells from neonatal animals and mixed olfactory cells from both neonatal and adult rats. Two to three months after lesioning, numerous regenerating fibres could be seen in each type of transplant. However, tracing of ascending dorsal column fibres showed that few regenerated beyond the lesion, even when transplanted with mixed olfactory cells from the adult olfactory bulb which have previously been reported to support regeneration which bridges a lesion. Despite the absence of axonal regeneration across the injury site, olfactory cell transplants led to improved spinal cord function in sensory pathways investigated electrophysiologically. When cord dorsum potentials (CDPs), evoked by electrical stimulation of the L4/L5 dorsal roots, were recorded from the spinal cord above and below a lesion at the lumbar 3/4 level, CDPs recorded from transplanted animals were significantly larger than those recorded from lesioned controls. In addition, sensory evoked potentials recorded over the sensorimotor cortex were larger and detectable over a more extensive area in transplanted animals. These results provide direct evidence that transplants of olfactory cells preserve the function of circuitry in the region of the lesion site and of ascending pathways originating near the injury. These actions, rather than axonal regeneration, may help ameliorate the effects of spinal cord injury.

Key Words: spinal cord injury; axonal regeneration; olfactory ensheathing cells; electrophysiology; cell transplantation

Abbreviations: CDPs, cord dorsum potentials; SEPs, sensory evoked potentials

Received December 22, 2006. Revised February 14, 2007. Accepted February 15, 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.