Home Email this page Print this page Bookmark this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size
Noise & Health  
 CURRENT ISSUE    PAST ISSUES    AHEAD OF PRINT    SEARCH   GET E-ALERTS    
 
 Next article
 Previous article
Table of Contents

Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Citation Manager
Access Statistics
Reader Comments
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed6370    
    Printed167    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded86    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

 ARTICLES
Year : 2001  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 11  |  Page : 65--78

Absence of hair cell protection by exogenous FGF-1 and FGF-2 delivered to guinea pig cochlea in vivo


1 Kresge Hearing Research Institute, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan USA; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
2 Kresge Hearing Research Institute, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan USA
3 Kresge Hearing Research Institute, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan USA; Department of Otolaryngology, University of Tohoku, Sendai, Japan

Correspondence Address:
Josef M Miller
Kresge Hearing Research Institute, 1301 East Ann Street, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-0506, USA

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 12689449

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Recent findings that glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF), neurotrophin-3 (NT­3), and transforming growth factor α can protect the auditory hair cells from acoustic trauma or aminoglycoside ototoxicity in vivo raise the question of whether other neurotrophic factors can also protect the hair cells in vivo. Fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) can protect hair cells from neomycin ototoxicity in vitro, and in vivo study has shown upregulation of FGF receptor­3 in the cochlea following noise exposure, suggesting that some FGF family members might play a role in protection or repair of the cochlea from damage. We therefore examined if FGF­1 and FGF-2 chronically delivered to the cochlea prior to noise overstimulation can attenuate noise-induced hair cell damage in vivo under conditions in which GDNF and NT-3 were effective. Pigmented female guinea pigs underwent left scala tympani implantation of a microcannula attached to an osmotic pump filled with artificial perilymph only or containing FGFs (10 or 1 µµg/ml FGF-1 or 10 µµg/ml FGF-2). They were exposed to noise (4 kHz octave band, 115 dB SPL, 5 hr) 4 days after surgery. Threshold shifts 10 days postexposure were essentially equivalent at all frequencies tested across different treatment groups. No significant difference in threshold shifts was observed between the treated and untreated ears in any of the groups. The extent of hair cell damage was also comparable among the different treatment groups. These findings indicate that exogenous FGF-1 or FGF-2 does not influence noise­induced hair cell damage under the experimental conditions used in this study, suggesting that these FGFs are not good candidates as auditory hair cell protectors in vivo.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article