| Title |
Carbon nanotubes impregnated with subventricular zone neural progenitor cells promotes recovery from stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s30273 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sung Ung Moon, Jihee Kim, Kiran Kumar Bokara, Jong Youl Kim, Dongwoo Khang, Thomas J Webster, Jong Eun Lee |
| Abstract |
The present in vivo study was conducted to evaluate whether hydrophilic (HL) or hydrophobic (HP) carbon nanotubes (CNTs) impregnated with subventricular zone neural progenitor cells (SVZ NPCs) could repair damaged neural tissue following stroke. For this purpose, stroke damaged rats were transplanted with HL CNT-SVZ NPCs, HP CNT-SVZ NPCs, or SVZ NPCs alone for 1, 3, 5, and 8 weeks. Results showed that the HP CNT-SVZ NPC transplants improved rat behavior and reduced infarct cyst volume and infarct cyst area compared with the experimental control and the HL CNT-SVZ NPC and SVZ NPCs alone groups. The transplantation groups showed an increase in the expression of nestin (cell stemness marker) and proliferation which was evident with the increased number of doublecortin and bromodeoxyuridine double-stained immunopositive cells around the lesion site. But, these effects were more prominent in the HP CNT-SVZ NPC group compared with the other transplantation groups. The HP CNT-SVZ NPC and HL CNT-SVZ NPC transplants increased the number of microtubule-associated protein 2 (marker for neurons) and decreased the number of glial fibrillary acidic protein (marker for astroglial cells) positive cells within the injury epicenter. The majority of the transplanted HP CNT-SVZ NPCs collectively broadened around the ischemic injured region and the SVZ NPCs differentiated into mature neurons, attained the synapse morphology (TUJ1, synaptophysin), and decreased microglial activation (CD11b/c [OX-42]). For these reasons, this study provided the first evidence that CNTs can improve stem cell differentiation to heal stroke damage and, thus, deserve further attention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 7% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
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 22 June 2012.
All research outputs
#16,580,596
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,076
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,717
of 179,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#60
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 179,215 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.