Role of argatroban in repair of spinal cord injury in rats

Abstract

Objective To investigate the effect of argatroban in repair of spinal cord injury in rats. Methods A total of 54 female Wistar rats were selected and divided into three groups according to the random number table: sham group, injury group and Argatroban group, with 18 rats in each group. The sham group only took the T10lamina; the injury group used the spinal cord injury device to make the rat spinal cord injury model; the Argatroban group received Argatroban treatment after spinal cord injury. The recovery of hindlimb motor function was evaluated by BBB score and clined plate test before injury and 7, 14, 21, 28, 35 and 42 days after injury. The sensory evoked potentials (SEP) and motor evoked potentials (MEP) were detected 42 days after operation. HE staining was used to compare the size of the cavity in the local region 42 days after injury. Results At day 7 after injury, the BBB score was (3.7±0.5)points and the inclined plane test was (28.0±2.6)° in the Argatroban group, which were better than those in the injury group [(3.3±0.5)points, (24.3±1.9)°] (P<0.05). At day 42 after injury, the BBB score was (13.0±0.8)points and inclined plane test was (50.7±2.7)° in the Argatroban group, which were significantly better than those in the injury group [(9.7±1.3) points, (40.5±2.7)°] (P<0.05). But all the above values in the Argatroban group were significantly lower than those in the sham group [(21.0±0.0)points, (60.0±0.0)°](P<0.05). At day 42 after operation, the SEP latency [(25.0±0.9)ms] in the Argatroban group was significantly shorter than that in the injury group [(31.5±1.9) ms]; the amplitude [(2.1±0.1)μV] in the Argatroban group was lower than that in the injury group [(0.5±0.1)μV] (P<0.05). The MEP latency [(11.5±1.0)ms] in the Argatroban group was significantly shorter than that in the injury group [(17.5±1.1)ms], and the amplitude [(4.8±0.8)μV] in the Argatroban group was lower than that in the injury group [(2.8±0.7)μV] (P<0.05). And the SEP or MEP latency and amplitude in the Argatroban group showed significant differences compared to the sham group [(7.5±1.0)ms, (7.5±1.0)μV](P<0.05). HE staining showed that the central area of the lesion in the Argatroban group [(0.35±0.04)mm2] was significantly smaller than that in the injury group [(0.71±0.05)mm2]. Conclusion After spinal cord injury, argatroban can protect the spinal cord tissue effectively in the injured area and promote recovery of sensory and motor function in the hind limbs of rats. Key words: Spinal cord injuries; Argatroban; Inflammation; Thrombin