AFFERENT-FIBERS SUPPLYING THE UTERUS IN THE RAT
AFFERENT-FIBERS SUPPLYING THE UTERUS IN THE RAT
复制标题
DOI：
10.1152/jn.1988.59.1.142
复制
发表时间：
1988-01-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
SATO, Y
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
BERKLEY, KJ;ROBBINS, A;SATO, Y
1.在目前的三部分研究中，电生理技术被用来表征大鼠腹下神经传入纤维对子宫的机械或化学刺激的反应，和解剖技术被用来识别子宫传入纤维进入脊髓的脊髓节段。2.在体内巴比妥酸盐麻醉的准备，腹下传入纤维反应的时间锁定的方式机械刺激局限于子宫和相邻的韧带的限制区域。接受野最常位于子宫体，尤其是宫颈上方。少数位于子宫角上，通常在准备手术期间靠近刺激区域。有效的机械刺激（压力、拉伸、挤压、探测，很少收缩）通常> 5g，并且刺激伴随着探针或收缩区域周围的短暂缺血。愤怒，除非极端，不是一个有效的刺激。对数据的回顾性分析表明，当大鼠处于阴道发情期/发情前期时，纤维可能对子宫刺激更敏感，而不是发情间期/发情后期。3.在体外制备，腹下传入纤维的反应呈剂量依赖性的方式注射到子宫动脉的镇痛化学物质缓激肽，5-羟色胺，和氯化钾。它们也对高剂量的CO2（盐水）和NaCN有反应，但很少对低剂量有反应。几乎所有的纤维都对一种以上的化学品作出反应，每种化学品都有独特的反应特征（例如，等待时间、持续时间、峰值速率）。4.注射辣根过氧化物酶到子宫体和小部分的相邻角在大鼠阴道发情一致标记的L1-S1背根神经节中的少量细胞，在L2和L 6的峰值。在发情周期被破坏的大鼠中，几乎没有细胞被标记（通过将它们在恒定的光照条件下保持数周）。5.这些结果表明，子宫传入纤维通过腹下（例如，L1-L4神经节）和骨盆（例如，L5-S1神经节）神经，并且腹下纤维能够传达关于子宫机械和化学刺激的时间和空间方面的相当精确的信息。这些结果也鼓励未来的研究，这些纤维的反应作为发情阶段或子宫状况的其他方面的函数而变化的可能性（例如，的刺激）。6.由于许多腹下神经纤维对足以产生缺血的机械刺激以及对镇痛化学物质和高浓度NaCN或CO2的反应，这些结果的一个初步解释是子宫腹下神经传入纤维有助于伤害性功能和疼痛感觉（特别是在发情或子宫刺激的某些阶段），并且不同于子宫盆腔神经传入纤维。然而，正如所讨论的，目前还不能排除腹下神经传入纤维的非伤害性功能或它们与盆神经传入纤维之间的功能相似性。
1. In the present three-part study electrophysiological techniques were used to characterize responses of afferent fibers in the rat hypogastric nerve to mechanical or chemical stimulation of the uterus, and anatomical techniques were used to identify the spinal segments through which uterine afferent fibers enter the spinal cord. 2. In an in vivo barbiturate-anesthetized preparation, hypogastric afferent fibers responded in a time-locked manner to mechanical stimulation confined to restricted regions of the uterus and adjacent liagment. Receptive fields were most often located on the uterine body, particularly over the cervix. The few located on the uterine horn were usually near regions irritated during preparative surgery. Effective mechanical stimuli (pressure, stretching, squeezing, probing, rarely contractions) were typically > 5 g and stimultaneously accompanied by transient ischemia around the probe or contracted area. Distension, unless extreme, was not an effective stimulus. Retrospective analysis of the data indicated that fibers may be more sensitive to uterine stimulation when rats are in vaginal estrus/proestrus than in diestrus/metestrus. 3. In an in vitro preparation, hypogastric afferent fibers responded in a dose-dependent fashion to injections into the uterine artery of the algesic chemicals bradykinin, 5-hydroxytryptamine, and KCl. They also responded to high doses of CO2 (in saline) and NaCN, but rarely to lower doses. Nearly all fibers responded to more than one chemical with response characteristics unique to each chemical (e.g., latency, duration, peak rate). 4. Injections of horseradish peroxidase into the uterine body and small portions of the adjacent horns in rats in vaginal estrus consistently labeled a small number of cells in the L1-S1 dorsal root ganglia, with peaks at L2 and L6. Virtually no cells were labeled in rats whose estrous cycle had been disrupted (by inadvertantly keeping them in constant light conditions for several weeks). 5. These results indicate that uterine afferent fibers travel to the central nervous system through both the hypogastric (e.g., L1-L4 ganglia) and pelvic (e.g., L5-S1 ganglia) nerves in the rat, and that hypogastric fibers are capable of conveying fairly precise information about temporal and spatial aspects of uterine mechanical and chemical stimulation. The results also encourage future research into the possibility that the responses of these fibers vary as a function of estrous stage or other aspects of the condition of the uterus (e.g., its irritation). 6. Because many hypogastric nerve fibers were responsive to mechanical stimuli intense enough to produce ischemia as well as to algesic chemicals and high concentrations of NaCN or CO2, one tentative interpretation of these results is that uterine hypogastric nerve afferent fibers subserve nociceptive functions and pain sensation (particularly during certain stages of estrous or uterine irritation) and differ from uterine pelvic nerve afferent fibers. As discussed, however, it is currently impossible to rule out either nonnonciceptive functions for hypogastric afferent fibers or functional similarities between them and pelvic nerve afferent fibers.