Posted by zeugma on February 12, 2006, at 15:44:05
In reply to Re: two other factors? » linkadge, posted by zeugma on February 12, 2006, at 15:29:29
this was the passage that I was thinking of when I said that AMI was neuroprotective in aged rats, in contrast to fluoxetine:
Interestingly, chronic amitriptyline treatment altered a specific aspect of water maze learning in the aged rats. The escape latency to find the hidden platform, thought to reflect the consolidation of spatial information via GRs (Oitzl and de Kloet, 1992), was unchanged. Furthermore, aged controls and amitriptyline-treated aged rats both had approximately equivalent declines in performance over the 6 month interval from initial testing in the water maze. This suggests that long-term memory does not appear to be preserved by amitriptyline treatment. In contrast, the search-escape strategies during the probe trial, thought to be more reflective of the actions of the MR (Oitzl and de Kloet, 1992), were enhanced in amitriptyline-treated aged rats. Together, this suggests that amitriptyline treatment may induce changes in hippocampal MR to alter the probe test times without affecting escape latencies. Previous studies have indeed shown that antidepressants, including amitriptyline, induce a more prominent effect on increasing hippocampal MR than GR expression and that the magnitude of this increase is dependent on treatment duration (Reul et al., 1993, 1994; Yau et al., 1995). Moreover, several studies suggest that it is the MR in the hippocampus (rather than the GR) that shows the more robust decline with aging (van Eekelen et al., 1991; Rothuizen et al., 1993; Hassan et al., 1999). >>
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:608339
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060212/msgs/608969.html