Experimental models of spinal cord injury (SCI) typically utilize contusion or compression injuries. Clinically, however, SCI is heterogeneous and the primary injury mode may affect secondary injury progression and neuroprotective therapeutic efficacy. Specifically, immunomodulatory agents are of therapeutic interest because the activation state of SCI macrophages may facilitate pathology but also improve repair. It is unknown currently how the primary injury biomechanics affect macrophage activation. Therefore, to determine the effects of compression subsequent to spinal contusion, we examined recovery, secondary injury, and macrophage activation in C57/BL6 mice after SCI with or without a 20 sec compression at two contusion impact forces (50 and 75 kdyn). We observed that regardless of the initial impact force, compression increased tissue damage and worsened functional recovery. Interestingly, compression-dependent damage is not evident until one week after SCI. Further, compression limits functional recovery to the first two weeks post-SCI; in the absence of compression, mice receiving contusion SCI recover for four weeks. To determine whether the recovery plateau is indicative of compression-specific inflammatory responses, we examined macrophage activation with immunohistochemical markers of purportedly pathological (CD86 and macrophage receptor with collagenous structure [MARCO]) and reparative macrophages (arginase [Arg1] and CD206). We detected significant increases in macrophages expression of MARCO and decreases in macrophage Arg1 expression with compression, suggesting a biomechanical-dependent shift in SCI macrophage activation. Collectively, compression-induced alterations in tissue and functional recovery and inflammation highlight the need to consider the primary SCI biomechanics in the design and clinical implementation of immunomodulatory therapies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChooA.M., LiuJ., DvorakM., TetzlaffW., and OxlandT.R. (2008). Secondary pathology following contusion, dislocation, and distraction spinal cord injuries. Exp. Neurol., 212, 490–506.
2.
ScheffS.W., RabchevskyA.G., FugacciaI., MainJ.A., and LumppJ.E.Jr. (2003). Experimental modeling of spinal cord injury: characterization of a force-defined injury device. J. Neurotrauma, 20, 179–193.
3.
GhasemlouN., KerrB.J., and DavidS. (2005). Tissue displacement and impact force are important contributors to outcome after spinal cord contusion injury. Exp. Neurol., 196, 9–17.
4.
McEwenM.L., and SpringerJ.E. (2006). Quantification of locomotor recovery following spinal cord contusion in adult rats. J. Neurotrauma, 23, 1632–1653.
5.
ForgioneN., KaradimasS.K., FoltzW.D., SatkunendrarajahK., LipA., and FehlingsM.G. (2014). Bilateral contusion-compression model of incomplete traumatic cervical spinal cord injury. J. Neurotrauma, 31, 1776–1788.
6.
HuangW.L., GeorgeK.J., IbbaV., LiuM.C., AverillS., QuartuM., HamlynP.J., and PriestleyJ.V. (2007). The characteristics of neuronal injury in a static compression model of spinal cord injury in adult rats. Eur. J. Neurosci., 25, 362–372.
7.
GrunerJ.A., YeeA.K., and BlightA.R. (1996). Histological and functional evaluation of experimental spinal cord injury: evidence of a stepwise response to graded compression. Brain Res. 729, 90–101.
8.
SjovoldS.G., MattucciS.F., ChooA.M., LiuJ., DvorakM.F., KwonB.K., TetzlaffW., and OxlandT.R. (2013). Histological effects of residual compression sustained for 60 minutes at different depths in a novel rat spinal cord injury contusion model. J. Neurotrauma, 30, 1374–1384.
9.
StreijgerF., BeerninkT.M.J., LeeJ.H., BhatnagarT., ParkS., KwonB.K., and TetzlaffW. (2013). Characterization of a cervical spinal cord hemicontusion injury in mice using the infinite horizon impactor. J. Neurotrauma, 30, 869–883.
10.
OkonE.B., StreijgerF., LeeJ.H., AndersonL.M., RussellA.K., and KwonB.K. (2013). Intraparenchymal microdialysis after acute spinal cord injury reveals differential metabolic responses to contusive versus compressive mechanisms of injury. J. Neurotrauma, 30, 1564–1576.
11.
SwartzK.R., ScheffN.N., RobertsK.N., and FeeD.B. (2009). Exacerbation of spinal cord injury due to static compression occurring early after onset. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 11, 570–574.
12.
DimarJ.R., GlassmanS.D., RaqueG.H., ZhangY.P., and ShieldsC.B. (1999). The influence of spinal canal narrowing and timing of decompression on neurologic recovery after spinal cord contusion in a rat model. Spine, 24, 1623–1633.
13.
KigerlK.A., GenselJ.C., AnkenyD.P., AlexanderJ.K., DonnellyD.J., and PopovichP.G. (2009). Identification of two distinct macrophage subsets with divergent effects causing either neurotoxicity or regeneration in the injured mouse spinal cord. J. Neurosci., 29, 13435–13444.
14.
DavidS., and KronerA. (2011). Repertoire of microglial and macrophage responses after spinal cord injury. Nat. Rev. Neurosci., 12, 388–399.
15.
GenselJ.C., and ZhangB. (2015). Macrophage activation and its role in repair and pathology after spinal cord injury. Brain Res. 1619, 1–11.
16.
GenselJ.C., DonnellyD.J., and PopovichP.G. (2011). Spinal cord injury therapies in humans: an overview of current clinical trials and their potential effects on intrinsic CNS macrophages. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets, 15, 505–518.
17.
SantiagoJ.M., RosasO., TorradoA.I., GonzálezM.M., Kalyan-MasihP.O., and MirandaJ.D. (2009). Molecular, anatomical, physiological, and behavioral studies of rats treated with buprenorphine after spinal cord injury. J. Neurotrauma, 26, 1783–1793.
18.
BassoD.M., FisherL.C., AndersonA.J., JakemanL.B., MctigueD.M., and PopovichP.G. (2006). Basso Mouse Scale for locomotion detects differences in recovery after spinal cord injury in five common mouse strains. J. Neurotrauma, 23, 635–659.
19.
RabchevskyA.G., FugacciaI., SullivanP.G., and ScheffS.W. (2001). Cyclosporin A treatment following spinal cord injury to the rat: behavioral effects and stereological assessment of tissue sparing. J. Neurotrauma, 18, 513–522.
20.
ZhangB., BaileyW.M., KopperT.J., OrrM.B., FeolaD.J., and GenselJ.C. (2015). Azithromycin drives alternative macrophage activation and improves recovery and tissue sparing in contusion spinal cord injury. J. Neuroinflammation, 12, 218.
21.
MotulskyH.J., and BrownR.E. (2006). Detecting outliers when fitting data with nonlinear regression—a new method based on robust nonlinear regression and the false discovery rate. BMC Bioinformatics, 7, 123.
22.
KigerlK.A., McGaughyV.M., and PopovichP.G. (2006). Comparative analysis of lesion development and intraspinal inflammation in four strains of mice following spinal contusion injury. J. Comp. Neurol., 494, 578–594.
23.
GenselJ.C., KopperT.J., ZhangB., OrrM.B., and BaileyW.M. (2017). Predictive screening of M1 and M2 macrophages reveals the immunomodulatory effectiveness of post spinal cord injury azithromycin treatment. Sci. Rep., 7, 40144.
24.
KubotaK., SaiwaiH., KumamaruH., KobayakawaK., MaedaT., MatsumotoY., HarimayaK., IwamotoY., and OkadaS. (2012). Neurological recovery is impaired by concurrent but not by asymptomatic pre-existing spinal cord compression after traumatic spinal cord injury. Spine, 37, 1448–1455.
25.
RopperA.E., ZengX., AndersonJ.E., YuD., HanI., HaragopalH., and TengY.D. (2015). An efficient device to experimentally model compression injury of mammalian spinal cord. Exp. Neurol., 271, 515–523.
26.
JoshiM., and FehlingsM.G. (2002). Development and characterization of a novel, graded model of clip compressive spinal cord injury in the mouse: Part 1. Clip design, behavioral outcomes, and histopathology. J. Neurotrauma, 19, 175–190.
27.
ChenK., LiuJ., AssinckP., BhatnagarT., StreijgerF., ZhuQ., DvorakM.F., KwonB.K., TetzlaffW., and OxlandT.R. (2016). Differential histopathological and behavioral outcomes eight weeks after rat spinal cord injury by contusion, dislocation, and distraction mechanisms. J. Neurotrauma, 33, 1667–1684.
28.
ChooA.M., LiuJ., LamC.K., DvorakM., TetzlaffW., and OxlandT.R. (2007). Contusion, dislocation, and distraction: primary hemorrhage and membrane permeability in distinct mechanisms of spinal cord injury. J. Neurosurg. Spine, 6, 255–266.
29.
PopovichP.G., LemeshowS., GenselJ.C., and TovarC.A. (2012). Independent evaluation of the effects of glibenclamide on reducing progressive hemorrhagic necrosis after cervical spinal cord injury. Exp. Neurol., 233, 615–622.
30.
ZhangB., and GenselJ.C. (2014). Is neuroinflammation in the injured spinal cord different than in the brain?. Examining intrinsic differences between the brain and spinal cord. Exp. Neurol., 258, 112–120.
31.
BatchelorP.E., TanS., WillsT.E., PorrittM.J., and HowellsD.W. (2008). Comparison of inflammation in the brain and spinal cord following mechanical injury. J. Neurotrauma, 25, 1217–1225.
32.
SchnellL., FearnS., KlassenH., SchwabM.E., and PerryV.H. (1999). Acute inflammatory responses to mechanical lesions in the CNS: differences between brain and spinal cord. Eur. J. Neurosc.i, 11, 3648–3658.
33.
ZhangY.K., LiuJ.T., PengZ.W., FanH., YaoA.H., ChengP., LiuL., JuG., and KuangF. (2013). Different TLR4 expression and microglia/macrophage activation induced by hemorrhage in the rat spinal cord after compressive injury. J. Neuroinflammation, 10, 112.
34.
GreenhalghA.D., Passos DosSantos, R., ZarrukJ.G., SalmonC.K., KronerA., and DavidS. (2016). Arginase-1 is expressed exclusively by infiltrating myeloid cells in CNS injury and disease. Brain Behav. Immun., 56, 61–67.
MawhinneyL.A., ThawerS.G., LuW.Y., RooijenN.V., WeaverL.C., BrownA., and DekabanG.A. (2012). Differential detection and distribution of microglial and hematogenous macrophage populations in the injured spinal cord of lys-EGFP-ki transgenic mice. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol., 71, 180–197.
37.
NovakowskiK.E., HuynhA., HanS., DorringtonM.G., YinC., TuZ., PelkaP., WhyteP., GuarnéA., SakamotoK., and BowdishD.M. (2016). A naturally occurring transcript variant of MARCO reveals the SRCR domain is critical for function. Immunol. Cell Biol., 94, 646–655.
38.
MukhopadhyayS., ChenY., SankalaM., PeiserL., PikkarainenT., KraalG., TryggvasonK., and GordonS. (2006). MARCO, an innate activation marker of macrophages, is a class A scavenger receptor for Neisseria meningitidis. Eur. J. Immunol., 36, 940–949.
39.
ElomaaO., KangasM., SahlbergC., TuukkanenJ., SormunenR., LiakkaA., ThesleffI., KraalG., and TryggvasonK. (1995). Cloning of a novel bacteria-binding receptor structurally related to scavenger receptors and expressed in a subset of macrophages. Cell, 80, 603–609.
40.
MukhopadhyayS., VarinA., ChenY., LiuB., TryggvasonK., and GordonS. (2011). SR-A/MARCO-mediated ligand delivery enhances intracellular TLR and NLR function, but ligand scavenging from cell surface limits TLR4 response to pathogens. Blood, 117, 1319–1328.
41.
BowdishD.M., SakamotoK., KimM.J., KroosM., MukhopadhyayS., LeiferC.A., TryggvasonK., GordonS., and RussellD.G. (2009). MARCO, TLR2, and CD14 are required for macrophage cytokine responses to mycobacterial trehalose dimycolate and Mycobacterium tuberculosis. PLoS Pathog., 5, e1000474.
42.
DahlM., BauerA.K., ArredouaniM., SoininenR., TryggvasonK., KleebergerS.R., and KobzikL. (2007). Protection against inhaled oxidants through scavenging of oxidized lipids by macrophage receptors MARCO and SR-AI/II. J. Clin. Invest., 117, 757–764.
43.
CarlsonG.D., MinatoY., OkadaA., GordenC.D., WardenK.E., BarbeauJ.M., BiroC.L., BahnuikE., BohlmanH.H., and LamannaJ.C. (1997). Early time-dependent decompression for spinal cord injury: vascular mechanisms of recovery. J. Neurotrauma, 14, 951–962.
44.
FennA.M., HallJ.C., GenselJ.C., PopovichP.G., and GodboutJ.P. (2014). IL-4 signaling drives a unique arginase+/IL-1β+ microglia phenotype and recruits macrophages to the inflammatory CNS: consequences of age-related deficits in IL-4Rα after traumatic spinal cord injury. J. Neurosci., 34, 8904–8917.
45.
DattoJ.P., BastidasJ.C., MillerN.L., ShahA.K., ArheartK.L., MarcilloA.E., DietrichW.D., and PearseD.D. (2015). Female rats demonstrate improved locomotor recovery and greater preservation of white and gray matter after traumatic spinal cord injury compared to males. J. Neurotrauma, 32, 1146–1157.
46.
ZhangB., BaileyW.M., BraunK.J., and GenselJ.C. (2015). Age decreases macrophage IL-10 expression: implications for functional recovery and tissue repair in spinal cord injury. Exp. Neurol., 273, 83–91.
47.
ZhangB., BaileyW.M., McVicarA.L., and GenselJ.C. (2016). Age increases reactive oxygen species production in macrophages and potentiates oxidative damage after spinal cord injury. Neurobiol. Aging, 47, 157–167.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
