No abstract

Objective: Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a severe type of neurological trauma. N6-methyladenosine (m6A) modification is one of the most common internal modifications of RNA. The role of METTL3, the predominant methylation enzyme of m6A modification, in SCI remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the role of methyltransferase METTL3 in SCI.Methods: After establishing the oxygen-glucose deprivation (OGD) model of PC12 cells and rat spinal cord hemisection model, we found that the expression of METTL3 and the overall m6A modification level were significantly increased in neurons. The m6A modification was identified on B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2) messenger RNA (mRNA) by bioinformatics analysis, and m6A-RNA immunoprecipitation and RNA immunoprecipitation. In addition, METTL3 was blocked by the specific inhibitor STM2457 and gene knockdown, and then apoptosis levels were measured.Results: In different models, we found that the expression of METTL3 and the overall m6A modification level were significantly increased in neurons. After inducing OGD, inhibition of METTL3 activity or expression increased the mRNA and protein levels of Bcl-2, inhibited neuronal apoptosis, and improved neuronal viability in the spinal cord.Conclusion: Inhibition of METTL3 activity or expression can inhibit the apoptosis of spinal cord neurons after SCI through the m6A/Bcl-2 signaling pathway.

Objective This retrospective study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through the Wiltse approach (W‐TLIF) vs minimally invasive microendoscopy‐assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (ME‐TLIF) in single‐segment lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods A retrospective study was conducted to study the differences in specific clinical outcomes between single‐segment LDH patients receiving W‐TLIF and ME‐TLIF. Single‐segment LDH patients admitted to the Fujian Medical University Union Hospital from March 2015 to June 2018 were included. All the participants were divided into the ME‐TLIF group or the W‐TLIF group according to their TLIF surgery types. Demographic characteristics, the visual analog score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale, blood loss volume, postoperative drainage, ambulated time, initial postoperative back pain, hospitalization duration, expenses, and improvement rates of patients in the two groups were collected for analysis. Radiographic fusion was ultimately assessed via the Bridwell interbody fusion grading system. All selected patients with TLIF were followed up for 1 year. Results Fifty‐seven patients were selected, with 26 in the ME‐TLIF group and 31 in the W‐TLIF group, both of whom were followed up for 1 year. The mean age of the included patients was 53.75 ± 9.313 years, and the sex ratio was indiscrimination. There was no significant difference in demographic data or operating time between the two groups prior to surgery. The blood loss volume (ME‐TLIF: 228.5 vs W‐TLIF: 681.3), postoperative drainage (ME‐TLIF:82.1 ± 23.5 vs W‐TLIF: 345.8 ± 65.2), initial postoperative back pain (ME‐TLIF: VAS_3 days: 1.96 ± 0.60 VAS_7 days: 1.73 ± 0.53, W‐TLIF: VAS_3 days: 2.48 ± 0.51 VAS_7 days: 1.87 ± 0.43), and hospitalization duration (ME‐TLIF: 9.04 vs. W‐TLIF: 11.29) were all significantly lower in the ME‐TILF group (p < 0.05). However, there were no statistical differences between the two groups in VAS, ODI, and JOA at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively (p > 0.05). The fusion rates of the two groups showed no notable difference (p > 0.05), while the X‐ray exposure time in the ME‐TLIF group was significantly longer than in the W‐TLIF group (p < 0.05). Conclusions ME‐TLIF surgery was an effective and satisfactory surgical technique to manage LDH. Although ME‐TLIF increased the operation time and intraoperative fluoroscopic irradiation volume, it could effectively relieve low back pain from early postoperative onset and promote early postoperative recovery compared with W‐TLIF.