J Physiol Wellcome Trust-funded researchers
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Physiology in Press

First published online on May 3, 2007.
Copyright © 2007 by The Physiological Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
582/2/825    most recent
jphysiol.2007.132373v1
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Warren, G. L
Right arrow Articles by Simeonova, P. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Warren, G. L
Right arrow Articles by Simeonova, P. P.

Received March 14, 2007
Revised April 17, 2007
Accepted after revision May 2, 2007

MECHANISMS OF SKELETAL MUSCLE INJURY AND REPAIR REVEALED BY GENE EXPRESSION STUDIES IN MOUSE MODELS

Gordon L Warren1, Mukesh Summan2, Xin Gao2, Rebecca Chapman2, Tracy Hulderman2, and Petia P. Simeonova2*

1 Division of Physical Therapy, Georgia State University
2 NIOSH, CDC

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: psimeonova{at}cdc.gov.

ABSTRACT Common acute injuries to skeletal muscle can lead to significant pain and disability. The current therapeutic approaches for treating muscle injuries are dependent on the clinical severity but not on the type of injury. In these studies, the pathophysiology and molecular pathways associated with two different types of skeletal muscle injury, one induced by direct destruction of muscle tissue (i.e., FI) and one induced by a contractile overload, more specifically high-force eccentric contractions (i.e., CI) were compared side by side. Histopathological evaluation and measurements of muscle strength were accompanied by analyses of expression for 12,488 known genes at four time points ranging from 6 hours to 7 days post-injury. Real-time RT-PCR was used to confirm some of the injury type differences in the gene expression temporal profiles. Our data revealed several pools of genes including early induction of transcription, myogenic, and stress-responsive factors common for both types of injury as well as pools of genes expressed specifically with one of the injury type. Only CI activated a set of genes associated with the repair of impaired proteins and structures including genes related to apoptosis, whereas while FI uniquely activated gene sets involved gene sets involved in extensive inflammatory responses, tissue remodeling, angiogenesis, and myofibre/extracellular matrix synthesis. In conclusion, sets of genes associated specifically with the nature of the injury may have application for development of new strategies for acceleration of the recovery process in injured skeletal muscle.


Key words: Muscle contraction • Muscle damage • Muscle mechanisms







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2007 The Physiological Society.