1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The role of KCC2 and NKCC1 in spinal cord injury: From physiology to pathology

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The balance of ion concentrations inside and outside the cell is an essential homeostatic mechanism in neurons and serves as the basis for a variety of physiological activities. In the central nervous system, NKCC1 and KCC2, members of the SLC12 cation-chloride co-transporter (CCC) family, participate in physiological and pathophysiological processes by regulating intracellular and extracellular chloride ion concentrations, which can further regulate the GABAergic system. Over recent years, studies have shown that NKCC1 and KCC2 are essential for the maintenance of Cl homeostasis in neural cells. NKCC1 transports Cl into cells while KCC2 transports Cl out of cells, thereby regulating chloride balance and neuronal excitability. An imbalance of NKCC1 and KCC2 after spinal cord injury will disrupt CI homeostasis, resulting in the transformation of GABA neurons from an inhibitory state into an excitatory state, which subsequently alters the spinal cord neural network and leads to conditions such as spasticity and neuropathic pain, among others. Meanwhile, studies have shown that KCC2 is also an essential target for motor function reconstruction after spinal cord injury. This review mainly introduces the physiological structure and function of NKCC1 and KCC2 and discusses their pathophysiological roles after spinal cord injury.

          Related collections

          Most cited references121

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

          Summary Background Neurological disorders are increasingly recognised as major causes of death and disability worldwide. The aim of this analysis from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2016 is to provide the most comprehensive and up-to-date estimates of the global, regional, and national burden from neurological disorders. Methods We estimated prevalence, incidence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs; the sum of years of life lost [YLLs] and years lived with disability [YLDs]) by age and sex for 15 neurological disorder categories (tetanus, meningitis, encephalitis, stroke, brain and other CNS cancers, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, motor neuron diseases, idiopathic epilepsy, migraine, tension-type headache, and a residual category for other less common neurological disorders) in 195 countries from 1990 to 2016. DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, was the main method of estimation of prevalence and incidence, and the Cause of Death Ensemble model (CODEm) was used for mortality estimation. We quantified the contribution of 84 risks and combinations of risk to the disease estimates for the 15 neurological disorder categories using the GBD comparative risk assessment approach. Findings Globally, in 2016, neurological disorders were the leading cause of DALYs (276 million [95% UI 247–308]) and second leading cause of deaths (9·0 million [8·8–9·4]). The absolute number of deaths and DALYs from all neurological disorders combined increased (deaths by 39% [34–44] and DALYs by 15% [9–21]) whereas their age-standardised rates decreased (deaths by 28% [26–30] and DALYs by 27% [24–31]) between 1990 and 2016. The only neurological disorders that had a decrease in rates and absolute numbers of deaths and DALYs were tetanus, meningitis, and encephalitis. The four largest contributors of neurological DALYs were stroke (42·2% [38·6–46·1]), migraine (16·3% [11·7–20·8]), Alzheimer's and other dementias (10·4% [9·0–12·1]), and meningitis (7·9% [6·6–10·4]). For the combined neurological disorders, age-standardised DALY rates were significantly higher in males than in females (male-to-female ratio 1·12 [1·05–1·20]), but migraine, multiple sclerosis, and tension-type headache were more common and caused more burden in females, with male-to-female ratios of less than 0·7. The 84 risks quantified in GBD explain less than 10% of neurological disorder DALY burdens, except stroke, for which 88·8% (86·5–90·9) of DALYs are attributable to risk factors, and to a lesser extent Alzheimer's disease and other dementias (22·3% [11·8–35·1] of DALYs are risk attributable) and idiopathic epilepsy (14·1% [10·8–17·5] of DALYs are risk attributable). Interpretation Globally, the burden of neurological disorders, as measured by the absolute number of DALYs, continues to increase. As populations are growing and ageing, and the prevalence of major disabling neurological disorders steeply increases with age, governments will face increasing demand for treatment, rehabilitation, and support services for neurological disorders. The scarcity of established modifiable risks for most of the neurological burden demonstrates that new knowledge is required to develop effective prevention and treatment strategies. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

            Summary Background Rehabilitation has often been seen as a disability-specific service needed by only few of the population. Despite its individual and societal benefits, rehabilitation has not been prioritised in countries and is under-resourced. We present global, regional, and country data for the number of people who would benefit from rehabilitation at least once during the course of their disabling illness or injury. Methods To estimate the need for rehabilitation, data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2019 were used to calculate the prevalence and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) of 25 diseases, impairments, or bespoke aggregations of sequelae that were selected as amenable to rehabilitation. All analyses were done at the country level and then aggregated to seven regions: World Bank high-income countries and the six WHO regions (ie, Africa, the Americas, Southeast Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean, and Western Pacific). Findings Globally, in 2019, 2·41 billion (95% uncertainty interval 2·34–2·50) individuals had conditions that would benefit from rehabilitation, contributing to 310 million [235–392] YLDs. This number had increased by 63% from 1990 to 2019. Regionally, the Western Pacific had the highest need of rehabilitation services (610 million people [588–636] and 83 million YLDs [62–106]). The disease area that contributed most to prevalence was musculoskeletal disorders (1·71 billion people [1·68–1·80]), with low back pain being the most prevalent condition in 134 of the 204 countries analysed. Interpretation To our knowledge, this is the first study to produce a global estimate of the need for rehabilitation services and to show that at least one in every three people in the world needs rehabilitation at some point in the course of their illness or injury. This number counters the common view of rehabilitation as a service required by only few people. We argue that rehabilitation needs to be brought close to communities as an integral part of primary health care to reach more people in need. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

              Summary Background Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and spinal cord injury (SCI) are increasingly recognised as global health priorities in view of the preventability of most injuries and the complex and expensive medical care they necessitate. We aimed to measure the incidence, prevalence, and years of life lived with disability (YLDs) for TBI and SCI from all causes of injury in every country, to describe how these measures have changed between 1990 and 2016, and to estimate the proportion of TBI and SCI cases caused by different types of injury. Methods We used results from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016 to measure the global, regional, and national burden of TBI and SCI by age and sex. We measured the incidence and prevalence of all causes of injury requiring medical care in inpatient and outpatient records, literature studies, and survey data. By use of clinical record data, we estimated the proportion of each cause of injury that required medical care that would result in TBI or SCI being considered as the nature of injury. We used literature studies to establish standardised mortality ratios and applied differential equations to convert incidence to prevalence of long-term disability. Finally, we applied GBD disability weights to calculate YLDs. We used a Bayesian meta-regression tool for epidemiological modelling, used cause-specific mortality rates for non-fatal estimation, and adjusted our results for disability experienced with comorbid conditions. We also analysed results on the basis of the Socio-demographic Index, a compound measure of income per capita, education, and fertility. Findings In 2016, there were 27·08 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 24·30–30·30 million) new cases of TBI and 0·93 million (0·78–1·16 million) new cases of SCI, with age-standardised incidence rates of 369 (331–412) per 100 000 population for TBI and 13 (11–16) per 100 000 for SCI. In 2016, the number of prevalent cases of TBI was 55·50 million (53·40–57·62 million) and of SCI was 27·04 million (24·98–30·15 million). From 1990 to 2016, the age-standardised prevalence of TBI increased by 8·4% (95% UI 7·7 to 9·2), whereas that of SCI did not change significantly (−0·2% [–2·1 to 2·7]). Age-standardised incidence rates increased by 3·6% (1·8 to 5·5) for TBI, but did not change significantly for SCI (−3·6% [–7·4 to 4·0]). TBI caused 8·1 million (95% UI 6·0–10·4 million) YLDs and SCI caused 9·5 million (6·7–12·4 million) YLDs in 2016, corresponding to age-standardised rates of 111 (82–141) per 100 000 for TBI and 130 (90–170) per 100 000 for SCI. Falls and road injuries were the leading causes of new cases of TBI and SCI in most regions. Interpretation TBI and SCI constitute a considerable portion of the global injury burden and are caused primarily by falls and road injuries. The increase in incidence of TBI over time might continue in view of increases in population density, population ageing, and increasing use of motor vehicles, motorcycles, and bicycles. The number of individuals living with SCI is expected to increase in view of population growth, which is concerning because of the specialised care that people with SCI can require. Our study was limited by data sparsity in some regions, and it will be important to invest greater resources in collection of data for TBI and SCI to improve the accuracy of future assessments. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Physiol
                Front Physiol
                Front. Physiol.
                Frontiers in Physiology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-042X
                15 December 2022
                2022
                : 13
                : 1045520
                Affiliations
                [1] 1 School of Rehabilitation , Capital Medical University , Beijing, China
                [2] 2 Department of Spinal and Neural Functional Reconstruction , China Rehabilitation Research Center , Beijing, China
                [3] 3 Chinese Institute of Rehabilitation Science , Beijing, China
                [4] 4 Center of Neural Injury and Repair , Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders , Beijing, China
                [5] 5 Beijing Key Laboratory of Neural Injury and Rehabilitation , Beijing, China
                [6] 6 School of Rehabilitation Sciences and Engineering , University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences , Qingdao, China
                Author notes

                Edited by: Paola de los Heros, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico

                Reviewed by: Maria Chavez-Canales, Institute of Biomedical Research, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico

                Jinwei Zhang, University of Exeter, United Kingdom

                *Correspondence: Liangjie Du, strongneck@ 123456qq.com ; Jianjun Li, crrc100@ 123456163.com
                [ † ]

                These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

                This article was submitted to Membrane Physiology and Membrane Biophysics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology

                Article
                1045520
                10.3389/fphys.2022.1045520
                9799334
                36589461
                fd68b366-45b4-4552-953c-96504f2d247d
                Copyright © 2022 Talifu, Pan, Gong, Xu, Zhang, Yang, Gao, Yu, Du and Li.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 15 September 2022
                : 05 December 2022
                Categories
                Physiology
                Review

                Anatomy & Physiology
                spinal cord injury,cccs,kcc2,nkcc1,neuropathic pain,spasticity,motor function reconstruction

                Comments

                Comment on this article