ABSTRACT
Hot compress modalities are used to ameliorate pain despite prevalent confusion about which modality should be used and when. Most recommendations for hot compresses are based on empirical experience, with limited evidence to support its efficacy. To obtain insight into the nerve transmission mechanism of hot compresses and to identify the nerve injury marker proteins specifically associated with sciatic nerve pain, we established a rat model of chronic constriction injury (CCI) and performed mechanical allodynia, electrophysiology, and histopathological analysis. All CCI rats exhibited geometric representation of the affected hind paw, which indicated a hyper-impact on both mechanical gait and asymmetry of gait on day 28. The CCI model after 28 days of surgery significantly reduced compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude, but also significantly reduced latency. Administration of hot compress for 3 weeks (heated at 40-42°C, cycle of 40 min, and rest for 20 min, three cycles each time, three times per week) significantly increased the paw withdrawal thresholds in response to stimulation by Von Frey fibers and reversed the CCI-induced reduced sciatic functional index (SFI) scores. Hot compress treatment in the CCI model improved CMAP amplitude and latency. The S100 protein expression level in the CCI+Hot compression group was 1.5-fold higher than in the CCI group; it dramatically reduced inflammation, such as tumor necrosis factor alpha and CD68 expression in nerve injury sites. Synaptophysin (Syn) expression in the CCI+Hot compression group was less than threefold in the CCI group at both nerve injury sites and brain (somatosensory cortex and hippocampus). This finding indicates that local nerve damage and inflammation cause significant alterations in the sensorimotor strip, and hot compress treatment could significantly ameliorate sciatic nerve pain by attenuating Syn and inflammatory factors from local pathological nerves to the brain. This study determines the potential efficacy and safety of hot compress, and may have important implications for its widespread use in sciatic nerve pain treatment.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Professional bus drivers are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease, but the underlying causes are unclear. Professional bus drivers often follow shift schedules. Especially, an association between shift work and early manifestations of cardiovascular disease has not been elucidated. Thus we investigated the links between shift work and arteriosclerosis risk in professional bus drivers. METHODS: Questionnaires were administered to 184 bus drivers on demographic characteristics, lifestyle, and occupational history from 5 transportation companies in Taiwan. Brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) was measured using a volume-plethysmographic apparatus. Body mass index, waist circumference, biochemical variables, and blood pressure were also measured. RESULTS: Arteriosclerotic risk factors (age, weekly driving hours, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and insulin level) differed in part among different groups of drivers. Long-term shift drivers had higher baPWV compared to regular drivers and short-term shift drivers (1594 cm/s vs. 1497 and 1432, p<0.01). Our multiple regression model showed that age (p<0.01) and diastolic blood pressure (p<0.01) were positively associated with baPWV in our professional drivers. After adjusting for all covariates, we observed that baPWV increased by 3.6 cm/s for per 1-year increment in years of shift driving. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term shift work could increase the risk of arteriosclerosis in professional bus drivers. Larger studies would be necessary to provide further evidence regarding this finding.
Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease/etiology , Motor Vehicles , Transportation , Work Schedule Tolerance/physiology , Adult , Anthropometry , Blood Pressure , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Taiwan , Young AdultABSTRACT
Unlike other eukaryotes, plants possess a complex family of heat stress transcription factors (Hsfs) with usually more than 20 members. Among them, Hsfs A4 and A5 form a group distinguished from other Hsfs by structural features of their oligomerization domains and by a number of conserved signature sequences. We show that A4 Hsfs are potent activators of heat stress gene expression, whereas A5 Hsfs act as specific repressors of HsfA4 activity. The oligomerization domain of HsfA5 alone is necessary and sufficient to exert this effect. Due to the high specificity of the oligomerization domains, other class A Hsfs are not affected. Pull-down assay and yeast two-hybrid interaction tests demonstrate that the tendency to form HsfA4/A5 heterooligomers is stronger than the formation of homooligomers. The specificity of interaction between Hsfs A4 and A5 was confirmed by bimolecular fluorescence complementation experiments. The major role of the representatives of the HsfA4/A5 group, which are not involved in the conventional heat stress response, may reside in cell type-specific functions connected with the control of cell death triggered by pathogen infection and/or reactive oxygen species.
Subject(s)
DNA-Binding Proteins/antagonists & inhibitors , DNA-Binding Proteins/physiology , Heat-Shock Proteins/antagonists & inhibitors , Heat-Shock Proteins/physiology , Plant Proteins/antagonists & inhibitors , Plant Proteins/physiology , Repressor Proteins/physiology , Solanum lycopersicum/physiology , Transcription Factors/antagonists & inhibitors , Transcription Factors/physiology , DNA-Binding Proteins/metabolism , Heat Shock Transcription Factors , Heat-Shock Proteins/metabolism , Plant Proteins/metabolism , Transcription Factors/metabolism , Transcriptional Activation/physiologyABSTRACT
Compared to the overall multiplicity of more than 20 plant Hsfs, detailed analyses are mainly restricted to tomato and Arabidopsis and to three important representatives of the family (Hsfs A1, A2 and B1). The three Hsfs represent examples of striking functional diversification specialized for the three phases of the heat stress (hs) response (triggering, maintenance and recovery). This is best illustrated for the tomato Hsf system: (i) HsfA1a is the master regulator responsible for hs-induced gene expression including synthesis of HsfA2 and HsfB1. It is indispensible for the development of thermotolerance. (ii) Although functionally equivalent to HsfA1a, HsfA2 is exclusively found after hs induction and represents the dominant Hsf, the "working horse" of the hs response in plants subjected to repeated cycles of hs and recovery in a hot summer period. Tomato HsfA2 is tightly integrated into a network of interacting proteins (HsfA1a, Hsp17-CII, Hsp17-CI) influencing its activity and intracellular distribution. (iii) Because of structural peculiarities, HsfB1 acts as coregulator enhancing the activity of HsfA1a and/or HsfA2. But in addition, it cooperates with yet to be identified other transcription factors in maintaining and/or restoring housekeeping gene expression.
