Fig. 5: Protection of spared axons with MN-MSC patch treatment after SCI.
a Schematic diagram of the experimental design. The MN or MN-MSC patch was implanted 3 h after SCI, the AAV tracer for axons was injected at 6 weeks after injury, and the histological study was performed at 8 weeks after injury. b Representative images of spinal sections stained with GFAP (green) and 5-HT (red) of rats in the six groups at 8 weeks after SCI. Solid lines indicate the boundary of the cavities. Scale bars for rostral and caudal indicate 500 µm and inter indicate 1 mm. b1–b8 show the details of the black boundary area, and the scale bars are 100 µm. Representative images of propriospinal axons (RFP labeled, Fig. S6) and NF axons (Fig. S7) in SCI rats with different treatments are shown in supplementary figures. c–h Quantification of the average fluorescence intensity of 5-HT (c), RFP (d), and NF (e) immunoreactivity on the rostral and caudal sides of the six groups with 5-HT (f), RFP (g), and NF (h) staining. Data are shown as the mean ± SEM. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons test and two-tailed paired t tests were used for comparisons between two groups. Control: n5-HT = 4, nRFP = 4, nNF = 4. MN: n5-HT = 3, nRFP = 3, nNF = 4. Gel-EV: n5-HT = 3, nRFP = 3, nNF = 3. Gel-MN: n5-HT = 3, nRFP = 3, nNF = 3. MN-EV: n5-HT = 4, nRFP = 4, nNF = 4. MN-MSC: n5-HT = 5, nRFP = 4, nNF = 4. These animals chosen randomly from each group. ANOVA for 5-HT of rostral: Total: F = 0.2836, p = 0.9152. ANOVA for 5-HT of caudal: Total: F = 47.76, p < 0.0001, Control vs MN-MSC, p < 0.0001, GEL-MSC vs MN-MSC, p < 0.0001, MN-EV vs MN-MSC, p = 0.0134. ANOVA for RFP of rostral: Total: F = 1.243, p = 0.3380. ANOVA for RFP of caudal: Total: F = 12.13, p < 0.0001, MN-EV vs MN-MSC, p = 0.0013. ANOVA for NF of rostral: Total: F = 1.167, p = 0.3675. ANOVA for NF of caudal: Total: F = 9.322, p = 0.0003, MN-EV vs MN-MSC, p = 0.01. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
