SCI develops in two phases: primary and secondary injury. The mechanical impact of the trauma destroys neurons and disrupts the architecture of the tissue, composing the primary phase, but it also induces the overproduction of deleterious substances, which provokes the secondary injury cascade (13).For the secondary injury cascade, numerous distinct mechanisms have been hypothesized and analyzed. The activation of microglia and oxidative stress are the pivotal secondary injury mechanisms after traumatic injury that construct the █ INTRODUCTION Neuro-trauma is one of the most devastating health care and social problems in both developed and underdeveloped countries. Spinal cord injury (SCI) constitutes a major portion of neuro-traumas. Global prevalence of SCI varies from 236 to 1.280 per million inhabitants (6). An enormous amount of resources and manpower has been made available to reverse the effects of SCI. The processes, which have been investigated for ameliorating the results of the injury, have been the target of novel treatments.AIm: Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) is a devastating health problem both for the patient and the clinician. Numerous treatment modalities have been studied to reverse the effects of spinal cord injury. Herein is reported the effects and the comparison of Alpha Lipoic Acid and N-Acetyl Cysteine on rats with SCI. mATERIAl and mEThODS: 38 adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into 5 groups: only laminectomy, laminectomy and trauma, laminectomy trauma and Alpha Lipoic Acid 100 mg/kg IP administration, laminectomy trauma and N-Acetyl Cysteine 300 mg/kg IP administration, and vehicle group (PEG). The trauma model was the Modified Allen Weight drop method. After the procedure, the rats' motor function was evaluated using the modified Tarlov Scale and consequently they were sacrificed and the spinal cord tissue was analyzed biochemically for inflammation markers.RESUlTS: Both Alpha Lipoic Acid and N-Acetyl Cysteine administration after the injury significantly improved the results. There was no statistically significant difference in between the agents. CONClUSION: Although these agents both proven to be effective in ameliorating the effects of SCI, there was not enough evidence in this research to conclude the benefit of one agent over the other.