针刺促进猫脊髓Ⅱ板层可塑性变化的穴位特异性——电镜定量研究

Acupoints Specificity in Promoting the Plasticity of Cat Spinal Lamina Ⅱ with Acupuncture Quantitative EM Study

为了解针刺穴位可促进脊髓的可塑性变化这一效应有无穴位特异性，采用针刺单侧后肢备用根猫术侧Ｌ６脊神经支配范围的“足三里”和“悬钟”、“伏兔”和“三阴交”两组穴位及与它们对应的非穴位，于３０天时用电镜定量方法计数穴位组与非穴位组脊髓Ⅱ板层内突触性终末之数量。结果：两组动物非背根来源的简单终末（ＳＴ）数无显著性差异（Ｐ＞０．０５），背根来源的复合终未（ＣＴ）数差异显著（Ｐ＜０．０５），针刺非穴位组的ＣＴ数仅为穴位组的５３％，表明针刺非穴位对ＣＴ数量无明显影响，提示针刺促进脊髓的可塑性变化具有穴位特异性。

Our previous studies have shown acupoints stimulation might promote the plasticity of spinal cord. In order to explore the acupoints specificity of the effects we used ten cats with unilateral dorsal partial rhizotomy(L 1 S 2, except L 6). The rhizotomy sides of five cats received acupuncture stimulation (acupoints stimulation group) at Zusanli (St36), Xuanzhong (GB 39), Futu (St32) and Sanyinjiao (Sp 6) in the innervated areas of L 6 spinal nerve for two courses, 10 days per coure. The rest cats were subjected to needling at the areas adjacent to the acupoints (nonacupoints stimulation group). Quantitative EM method was applied to detect (the population of synaptic terminals in lamina Ⅱ 30 days postoperation. According to the number of synaptic contacts between synaptic terminal and postsynaptic element, synaptic terminals were divided into two types: the simple terminal (ST) coming from spinal and descending tract, and the comlex terminal (CT) from dorsal root. The average numbers of the two types′ synaptic terminals per photo were compared directly because the acupoints and nonacupoints groups′ transverse areas of lamina Ⅱ showed no significant difference. The results showed:(1) There was no significant difference for ST number between two groups. Associated with our previous study that acupoints stimulation did not influence ST number, the present result indicated that nonacupoints stimulation had no effect on ST number. (2) The complex terminal numbers were statistically different ( P <0.05). The percentage of CT in the nonacupoints group was only 53% of that in the acupoints group. This result was similar to two other nonacupuncture groups in our laboratory (the percentages were 59% and 62% respectively). It indicates that the effect of nonacupoints stimulation is similar to that of nonneedling, i.e. nonacupoints stimulation does not promote the plasticity of spinal lamina Ⅱ or there might be acupoints specificity in promoting the plasticity of spinal laminal Ⅱ.