Logo-apb
Adv Pharm Bull. 2015;5(2): 189-194.
doi: 10.15171/apb.2015.026
PMID: 26236656
PMCID: PMC4517078
Scopus ID: 84930395276
  Abstract View: 1870
  PDF Download: 877

Original Research

Comparative Study on the Effects of Ceftriaxone and Monocytes on Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury in Rat

Javad Tajkey 1, Alireza Biglari 2*, Bohlol Habibi Asl 1*, Ali Ramazani 3, Saeideh Mazloomzadeh 4

1 Department of Pharmacology, School of Pharmacy, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
2 Department of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, School of Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
3 Zanjan Pharmaceutical Biotechnology Research Center, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
4 Department of Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran.
*Corresponding Authors: Email: biglari@zums.ac.ir; Email: bhabibi@iran.ir

Abstract

Purpose: Comparison between the efficacy of ceftriaxone and monocytes on improvement of neuron protection and functional recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) in rat. Methods: Rats were randomly divided into three groups of ten. Spinal cord injury was performed on rats under general anesthesia using the weight dropping method. Ceftriaxone was injected intraperitoneally 200 mg/kg/day for seven days after SCI. Monocytes were injected 2 × 105 cells 4 days after SCI. Hind limb motor function was assessed using the Basso, Beattie and Bresnahan (BBB) scale. Corticospinal tract (CST) axons were traced by injection of biotin dextran amine (BDA) into the sensorimotor cortex. Results: There were statistically significant differences in BBB scores in ceftriaxone in comparison to both monocytes receiving and control groups. On the other hand there were statistically significant differences in axon counting in both ceftriaxone and monocytes receiving groups in comparison to control group. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that ceftriaxone improves functional recovery more effective than monocytes in rats after SCI. These results are from an experimental model and validation is required for further investigation.
First Name
 
Last Name
 
Email Address
 
Comments
 
Security code


Abstract View: 1871

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


PDF Download: 877

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

Submitted: 23 Apr 2014
Revision: 24 Jun 2014
ePublished: 01 Jun 2015
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)