Neural plasticity and functional recovery of human central nervous system with special reference to spinal cord injury

Abstract

Study design: Literature review. Objective: To study the progress that has been made in neural plasticity for the past few decades. Setting: United Kingdom/China. Methods: An electronic search of relevant publications through PubMed was conducted using two key words: 'axonal regeneration' and 'neural plasticity'. The search included publications of the past three decades of all languages and of both animal and human studies. After confirmation of immense increase of publications on neural plasticity, reviewing of neural plasticity alone was conducted. The review covered only the most important and clinically relevant publications. For convenience of reading by busy clinicians, discussions focused on cellular and functional levels, and only the most investigated molecules were mentioned. The size of references is also planned to be concise rather than comprehensive into three digits. Results: Neural plasticity is about memory and learning. The entire process of neural plasticity is presented in the sequence of (1) lesion-induced plasticity, (2) clearance of debris, (3) collateral sprouting (4) potentiation. The recent discovery and understanding of the important role of Chondroitinase in clearance of debris is discussed in detail. Conclusion: Neural plasticity has enormous potentials in facilitating functional recovery. It is a realistic target than structural axonal regeneration at current level of neuroscience.

CSPGs inhibit axon branching by impairing mitochondria‐dependent regulation of actin dynamics and axonal translation

“…CSPGs are also a major component of the perineuronal nets that regulate developmental neuronal plasticity (Miao et al, 2014;Dyck and Karimi-Abdolrezaee, 2015). An additional role of CSPGs is to suppress axon collateral branching in vivo (Barritt et al, 2006;Tom et al, 2009;Lee et al, 2010;Starkey et al, 2012;Lee et al, 2014;Lemarchant et al, 2014;Lang et al, 2015), and this rewiring of existing circuitry through axon branching is of major importance in the response of the nervous system to injury (Reviewed in Onifer et al, 2011;Wang and Sun, 2011;Dietz and Fouad, 2014;Kadomatsu and Sakamoto, 2014). While it is clear that CSPGs negatively regulate axon branching the mechanism used by CSPGs to suppress the formation of axon branches remains to be elucidated.…”

Use of Stereognosis combined with TENS to Promote Late Motor Recovery in an Individual with Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury: A Case Report

“…Wang suggests that functional recovery after SCI is a "new memorizing and learning process based on neural plasticity" [7]. The time frame and extent to which an individual can recover following a neurological injury is dependent on intricate interactions between physiological and environmental factors.…”

“…Due to the developmental complexity of the central nervous system (CNS), repair and restoration of the somatomotor system is difficult to achieve. Fortunately, the natural processes of CNS recovery can be enhanced via pharmaceutical, physical and biological means [7].…”

Locomotor recovery after spinal cord hemisection/contusion injures in bonnet monkeys: Footprint testing—a minireview

“…RANGASAMY Synapse with an incomplete SC injury indicate that the loss of SC function can be spontaneously restored (Bracken et al, 1984). Indeed, spontaneous improvement in motor, sensory, or other neurological function occurs in large number of patients (60-80%) with partial motor sparing supporting the concept that preserved projections can undergo spontaneous plasticity to generate functional improvement in humans Wang and Sun, 2011). In addition, nearly 10 to 20% of subjects with severe SC injuries regain some useful function, with this occurring within a few months or years of the recovery of motor function (Dimitrijevic, 1988;Frankel et al, 1998).…”