
Chinese General Practice ›› 2023, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (33): 4187-4193.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0115
Special Issue: 中医最新文章合辑
• Original Research • Previous Articles Next Articles
Received:2023-02-01
Revised:2023-05-28
Published:2023-11-20
Online:2023-06-13
Contact:
FENG Xiaodong
通讯作者:
冯晓东
作者简介:基金资助:
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0115
| 评分 | 表现 |
|---|---|
| 0分 | 无缺损症状;无神经损伤 |
| 1分 | 提尾时对侧前肢内收屈曲;轻度神经损伤 |
| 2分 | 向对侧追尾式旋转;中度神经损伤 |
| 3分 | 行走费力且向对侧倾倒;重度神经损伤 |
| 4分 | 不能自发活动伴意识丧失;极重度神经损伤 |
Table 1 Zea-Longa scoring criteria
| 评分 | 表现 |
|---|---|
| 0分 | 无缺损症状;无神经损伤 |
| 1分 | 提尾时对侧前肢内收屈曲;轻度神经损伤 |
| 2分 | 向对侧追尾式旋转;中度神经损伤 |
| 3分 | 行走费力且向对侧倾倒;重度神经损伤 |
| 4分 | 不能自发活动伴意识丧失;极重度神经损伤 |
| 基因 | 引物序列(5'→3') |
|---|---|
| BDNF | F:GACTCCCCGGCTTGGAGAAG R:CTGAGGGAACCCGGTCTCAT |
| TrkB | F:GGATTCTGCCTGCTGGTGAT R:ACCCATCCAGGGGGATCTTAT |
| PI3K | F:ATCGACCTACACTTGGGGGA R:CAATATCTTCTGGCCGGGCT |
| Akt | F:AGGAGGTCATCGTTGCCAAG R:GGTCGTGGGTCTGGAATGAG |
| GAPDH | F:ACAGCAACAGGGTGGTGGAC R:TTTGAGGGTGCAGCGAACTT |
Table 2 RT-PCR primer sequence
| 基因 | 引物序列(5'→3') |
|---|---|
| BDNF | F:GACTCCCCGGCTTGGAGAAG R:CTGAGGGAACCCGGTCTCAT |
| TrkB | F:GGATTCTGCCTGCTGGTGAT R:ACCCATCCAGGGGGATCTTAT |
| PI3K | F:ATCGACCTACACTTGGGGGA R:CAATATCTTCTGGCCGGGCT |
| Akt | F:AGGAGGTCATCGTTGCCAAG R:GGTCGTGGGTCTGGAATGAG |
| GAPDH | F:ACAGCAACAGGGTGGTGGAC R:TTTGAGGGTGCAGCGAACTT |
| 组别 | 只数 | 术后2 h | 治疗第7天 | 治疗第14天 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | ||
| 空白组 | 12 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 模型组abcdef | 12 | 0 | 1(8.3) | 2(16.7) | 9(75.0) | 0 | 0 | 2(16.7) | 3(25.0) | 7(58.3) | 0 | 0 | 3(25.0) | 7(58.3) | 2(16.7) | 0 |
| 电针组abgh | 12 | 0 | 1(8.3) | 3(25.0) | 8(66.7) | 0 | 0 | 6(50.0) | 4(33.3) | 2(16.7) | 0 | 4(33.3) | 7(58.3) | 1(8.3) | 0 | 0 |
| H值 | 42.53 | 42.17 | 37.81 | |||||||||||||
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | |||||||||||||
Table 3 Comparison of Zea-Longa scores among 4 groups of rats
| 组别 | 只数 | 术后2 h | 治疗第7天 | 治疗第14天 | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | 0分 | 1分 | 2分 | 3分 | 4分 | ||
| 空白组 | 12 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12(100.0) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 模型组abcdef | 12 | 0 | 1(8.3) | 2(16.7) | 9(75.0) | 0 | 0 | 2(16.7) | 3(25.0) | 7(58.3) | 0 | 0 | 3(25.0) | 7(58.3) | 2(16.7) | 0 |
| 电针组abgh | 12 | 0 | 1(8.3) | 3(25.0) | 8(66.7) | 0 | 0 | 6(50.0) | 4(33.3) | 2(16.7) | 0 | 4(33.3) | 7(58.3) | 1(8.3) | 0 | 0 |
| H值 | 42.53 | 42.17 | 37.81 | |||||||||||||
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | |||||||||||||
| 组别 | 只数 | 第9天 | 第10天 | 第11天 | 第12天 | 第13天 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 12 | 38.6±5.0 | 31.1±5.9 | 25.8±4.5 | 13.9±3.7 | 8.4±3.3 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 37.7±7.2 | 31.4±6.2 | 25.1±5.6 | 14.0±4.2 | 8.2±3.4 |
| 模型组 | 12 | 51.9±6.3ab | 42.4±6.0ab | 34.5±5.0ab | 27.5±5.1ab | 20.7±5.9ab |
| 电针组 | 12 | 46.5±6.2c | 37.6±5.1c | 29.5±4.9c | 20.4±3.3c | 12.4±4.2c |
| F值 | F交互=1.191,F组间=52.513,F时间=277.985 | |||||
| P值 | P交互=0.30,P组间<0.05,P时间<0.05 | |||||
Table 4 Comparison of incubation period among 4 groups of rats
| 组别 | 只数 | 第9天 | 第10天 | 第11天 | 第12天 | 第13天 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 12 | 38.6±5.0 | 31.1±5.9 | 25.8±4.5 | 13.9±3.7 | 8.4±3.3 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 37.7±7.2 | 31.4±6.2 | 25.1±5.6 | 14.0±4.2 | 8.2±3.4 |
| 模型组 | 12 | 51.9±6.3ab | 42.4±6.0ab | 34.5±5.0ab | 27.5±5.1ab | 20.7±5.9ab |
| 电针组 | 12 | 46.5±6.2c | 37.6±5.1c | 29.5±4.9c | 20.4±3.3c | 12.4±4.2c |
| F值 | F交互=1.191,F组间=52.513,F时间=277.985 | |||||
| P值 | P交互=0.30,P组间<0.05,P时间<0.05 | |||||
| 组别 | 只数 | 穿越平台次数 |
|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 12 | 7.99±2.71 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 7.64±3.20 |
| 模型组 | 12 | 2.19±1.52ab |
| 电针组 | 12 | 4.87±1.65c |
| F值 | 15.57 | |
| P值 | <0.05 |
Table 5 Comparison of times of crossing the effective region of the platform among 4 groups of rats
| 组别 | 只数 | 穿越平台次数 |
|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 12 | 7.99±2.71 |
| 假手术组 | 12 | 7.64±3.20 |
| 模型组 | 12 | 2.19±1.52ab |
| 电针组 | 12 | 4.87±1.65c |
| F值 | 15.57 | |
| P值 | <0.05 |
| 组别 | 例数 | BDNF | TrkB | PI3K | Akt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 3 | 1.00±0.09 | 1.00±0.02 | 1.00±0.12 | 1.00±0.20 |
| 假手术组 | 3 | 0.99±0.04 | 1.00±0.02 | 1.03±0.10 | 1.00±0.10 |
| 模型组 | 3 | 0.23±0.03ab | 0.48±0.10ab | 0.55±0.04ab | 0.53±0.05ab |
| 电针组 | 3 | 0.76±0.08c | 0.75±0.07c | 0.88±0.16c | 0.90±0.09c |
| F值 | 91.95 | 44.87 | 11.45 | 10.35 | |
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
Table 6 Comparison of mRNA levels of BDNF,TrkB,PI3K and Akt in hippocampal tissues of four groups
| 组别 | 例数 | BDNF | TrkB | PI3K | Akt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 3 | 1.00±0.09 | 1.00±0.02 | 1.00±0.12 | 1.00±0.20 |
| 假手术组 | 3 | 0.99±0.04 | 1.00±0.02 | 1.03±0.10 | 1.00±0.10 |
| 模型组 | 3 | 0.23±0.03ab | 0.48±0.10ab | 0.55±0.04ab | 0.53±0.05ab |
| 电针组 | 3 | 0.76±0.08c | 0.75±0.07c | 0.88±0.16c | 0.90±0.09c |
| F值 | 91.95 | 44.87 | 11.45 | 10.35 | |
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
| 组别 | 只数 | BDNF | TrkB | p-PI3K/PI3K | p-Akt/Akt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 3 | 0.32±0.07 | 0.95±0.04 | 0.58±0.01 | 0.33±0.03 |
| 假手术组 | 3 | 0.32±0.07 | 0.91±0.06 | 0.59±0.04 | 0.35±0.03 |
| 模型组 | 3 | 0.08±0.03ab | 0.43±0.02ab | 0.31±0.10ab | 0.17±0.02ab |
| 电针组 | 3 | 0.23±0.07c | 0.65±0.06c | 0.54±0.09c | 0.32±0.09c |
| F值 | 10.58 | 45.22 | 10.66 | 7.62 | |
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
Table 7 Comparison of protein relative expression levels of BDNF,TrkB,p-PI3K/PI3K and p-Akt/Akt in hippocampal tissues of four groups
| 组别 | 只数 | BDNF | TrkB | p-PI3K/PI3K | p-Akt/Akt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 空白组 | 3 | 0.32±0.07 | 0.95±0.04 | 0.58±0.01 | 0.33±0.03 |
| 假手术组 | 3 | 0.32±0.07 | 0.91±0.06 | 0.59±0.04 | 0.35±0.03 |
| 模型组 | 3 | 0.08±0.03ab | 0.43±0.02ab | 0.31±0.10ab | 0.17±0.02ab |
| 电针组 | 3 | 0.23±0.07c | 0.65±0.06c | 0.54±0.09c | 0.32±0.09c |
| F值 | 10.58 | 45.22 | 10.66 | 7.62 | |
| P值 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 | <0.05 |
| [1] |
GBD Causes of Death Collaborators. Global,regional,and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death,1980-2016:a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016[J]. Lancet,2017,390(10100):1151-1210. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32152-9.
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
中国卒中学会,卒中后认知障碍管理专家委员会. 卒中后认知障碍管理专家共识[J]. 中国卒中杂志,2017,12(6):519-531. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1673-5765.2017.06.011.
|
| [4] |
高静,白艳杰,冯晓东. 《欧洲卒中组织与欧洲神经病学学会卒中后认知障碍的联合指南》解读[J]. 华西医学,2022,37(5):641-645. DOI:10.7507/1002-0179.202204020.
|
| [5] |
苏凯奇,高静,李洁莹,等. 基于古今医案云平台分析针刺治疗中风后认知障碍选穴规律[J]. 中国针灸,2022,42(1):99-103. DOI:10.13703/j.0255-2930.20201123-k0001.
|
| [6] |
刘娇,冯晓东. 电针百会、神庭穴配合康复训练治疗脑卒中后认知障碍临床研究[J]. 中医学报,2013,28(4):608-610.
|
| [7] |
薛洋,孙伟娟,刘飞来,等. 电针神庭、百会联合功能康复训练治疗脑卒中后认知障碍42例[J]. 中医研究,2018,31(1):57-60. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1001-6910.2018.01.25.
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
黎帅,谭洁,张泓,等. 穴位埋线对慢性缺血性认知障碍模型大鼠空间学习记忆能力及海马兴奋性氨基酸毒性相关蛋白的影响[J]. 针刺研究,2018,43(6):347-352. DOI:10.13702/j.1000-0607.170385.
|
| [14] |
李忠仁. 实验针灸学[M]. 2版. 北京:中国中医药出版社,2007.
|
| [15] |
詹杰,潘锐焕,郭友华,等. 针刺百会、神庭联合基础治疗和常规康复训练治疗脑卒中后认知障碍:随机对照研究[J]. 中国针灸,2016,36(8):803-806. DOI:10.13703/j.0255-2930.2016.08.007.html.
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
高静,赖名殷,梅氏清心,等. 电针对抑郁大鼠前额叶脑源性神经营养因子/哺乳动物雷帕霉素复合物1通路及突触可塑性的影响[J]. 针刺研究,2022,47(1):15-20,32. DOI:10.13702/j.1000-0607.201293.
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [1] | YANG Xiaofeng, LI Xianwen, WU Yanfeng, ZHANG Qian, CHEN Juan, ZHAO Fengjiao. Association of Serum Vascular Endothelial Cadherin Levels with the Risk of Post-stroke Cognitive Impairment in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(20): 2867-2873. |
| [2] | LIU Ying, LIU Shiwei, ZHANG Chi, SHEN Ji, ZHANG Yushan, ZHANG Jie, SANG Yingchen, WANG Youjiao, WANG Lei, ZHOU Houguang, SHI Hong. Prevalence and Associated Factors of Subjective Cognitive Decline among Older Stroke Patients in China [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(20): 2829-2835. |
| [3] | WU Ruining, ZHOU Ming, ZHANG Gongzi, LI Jun, XIE Suhang, LIU Yangxiaoxue, ZHANG Jiali, LIU Maomao, HUANG Liping. Study on Fixed and Mobile Exoskeleton Robots in Improving Lower Limb Function and Quality of Life in Stroke Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(17): 2326-2333. |
| [4] | JI Ying, GUO Chuan, ZHU Shizhe, JI Panpan, WANG Tong, KAN Chaojie, WANG Qinglei. Effects of Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation of the Cerebellum on Different Balance Abilities in Patients with Supratentorial Stroke: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(15): 2022-2028. |
| [5] | TIAN Anni, YANG Jing, SUN Jing, WANG Shichun. Effect of Robot-assisted Training on the Recovery of Hand Motor Function in Patients with Different Stages of Stroke: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(14): 1911-1920. |
| [6] | HAN Yue, BIAN Zhe, GU Haochen, WANG Dali, PENG Yanbo. Impact of Cumulative Defined Daily Dose of Statins on Recurrence Risk in Ischemic Stroke Patients [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(14): 1821-1826. |
| [7] | LIU Yang, LIANG Fang, WU Ling, LI Wenlei, LI Pengfei. Diagnostic Value of Non-conventional Lipids and the Triglyceride-glucose Index in First-onset Acute Ischemic Stroke [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(11): 1422-1429. |
| [8] | WANG Xiaonan, RUAN Xiaonan, LIU Yang, WU Kang, QIU Hua, LIU Qingping, SONG Jiahui, GAO Jiaojiao, ZHOU Yi, LIU Xiaolin. Correlation between Anthropometric Indices and the Risk of Stroke: a Nested Case-control Study [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(08): 1020-1028. |
| [9] | CAO Lei, LIU Xuechun, JIANG Wei, CHEN Yan, YAN Sunhong, DU Jing. Study on the Prediction of Muscle Attenuation in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke by the Cross-sectional Area and Thickness of the Temporalis Muscle [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(08): 997-1007. |
| [10] | HU Naixiao, ZHANG Hao, WANG Bo, QI Xin, DONG Jianhong, XUE Ruizhong, ZHANG Qingsu. Study of the Therapeutic Effect of Intraoral Balloon Dilation Combined with K-point Stimulation in Patients with Post-stroke Pseudobulbar Palsy Associated Dysphagia and Trismus [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(05): 591-596. |
| [11] | ZHAO Xuejiao, LI Juan, LI Yujie, LU Ting, Xian Lihong, YAN Huan. Prevalence Trends and Influencing Factors for Post-stroke Cognitive Impairment in China: a Meta-analysis [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(03): 380-392. |
| [12] | FAN Zhuanzhuan, LI Wenting, MA Guoliang. Relationship between the Chinese Visceral Adipose Index and Cardiovascular Disease in Postmenopausal Women: a Prospective Cohort Study [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 180-187. |
| [13] | YU Hao, LIAO Peng, LUO Li. Digital Therapy for Stroke: Progress and Challenges from Screening to Intervention [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 240-246. |
| [14] | LONG Yutong, LU Shiyu, TAN Jie, YANG Bolu, DUAN Jingying, YANG Tongde, YAN Lijing, GONG Enying, SHAO Ruitai. Long-term Medication Adherence Attitudes and Behaviors of Stroke Patients in Rural Areas of China and Related Factors: Based on Follow-up Data from a Certain County in Hebei Province [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(02): 170-179. |
| [15] | HAN Xue, LIU Huan, LOU Xiaole, SONG Jianing, ZHANG Ziang, GENG Zongxiao, WANG Shan, ZHANG Yongqing, XU Lei. Intermittent θ Burst Stimulation Combined with Chin Tuck Against Resistance Training for Dysphagia in Stroke Patients: a Randomized Controlled Trial [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(29): 3625-3630. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||