MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157916066 · doi:10.1186/1471-2202-13-15

Excitability of Aβ sensory neurons is altered in an animal model of peripheral neuropathy

2012· article· en· W2157916066 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Neuroscience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsNeuroscienceReceptive fieldDorsal root ganglionSensory systemNociceptionElectrophysiologyStimulationSensory neuronDepolarizationNeuropathic painPeripheralSciatic nerveMedicineAnatomyBiologyInternal medicineReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Causes of neuropathic pain following nerve injury remain unclear, limiting the development of mechanism-based therapeutic approaches. Animal models have provided some directions, but little is known about the specific sensory neurons that undergo changes in such a way as to induce and maintain activation of sensory pain pathways. Our previous studies implicated changes in the Aβ, normally non-nociceptive neurons in activating spinal nociceptive neurons in a cuff-induced animal model of neuropathic pain and the present study was directed specifically at determining any change in excitability of these neurons. Thus, the present study aimed at recording intracellularly from Aβ-fiber dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons and determining excitability of the peripheral receptive field, of the cell body and of the dorsal roots. METHODS: A peripheral neuropathy was induced in Sprague Dawley rats by inserting two thin polyethylene cuffs around the right sciatic nerve. All animals were confirmed to exhibit tactile hypersensitivity to von Frey filaments three weeks later, before the acute electrophysiological experiments. Under stable intracellular recording conditions neurons were classified functionally on the basis of their response to natural activation of their peripheral receptive field. In addition, conduction velocity of the dorsal roots, configuration of the action potential and rate of adaptation to stimulation were also criteria for classification. Excitability was measured as the threshold to activation of the peripheral receptive field, the response to intracellular injection of depolarizing current into the soma and the response to electrical stimulation of the dorsal roots. RESULTS: In control animals mechanical thresholds of all neurons were within normal ranges. Aβ DRG neurons in neuropathic rats demonstrated a mean mechanical threshold to receptive field stimulation that were significantly lower than in control rats, a prolonged discharge following this stimulation, a decreased activation threshold and a greater response to depolarizing current injection into the soma, as well as a longer refractory interval and delayed response to paired pulse electrical stimulation of the dorsal roots. CONCLUSIONS: The present study has demonstrated changes in functionally classified Aβ low threshold and high threshold DRG neurons in a nerve intact animal model of peripheral neuropathy that demonstrates nociceptive responses to normally innocuous cutaneous stimuli, much the same as is observed in humans with neuropathic pain. We demonstrate further that the peripheral receptive fields of these neurons are more excitable, as are the somata. However, the dorsal roots exhibit a decrease in excitability. Thus, if these neurons participate in neuropathic pain this differential change in excitability may have implications in the peripheral drive that induces central sensitization, at least in animal models of peripheral neuropathic pain, and Aβ sensory neurons may thus contribute to allodynia and spontaneous pain following peripheral nerve injury in humans.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.639
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it