HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (66) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tidball, J. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Tidball, J. G.

INVITED REVIEW

Inflammatory processes in muscle injury and repair

Departments of Physiological Science and Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
Modified muscle use or injury can produce a stereotypic inflammatory response in which neutrophils rapidly invade, followed by macrophages. This inflammatory response coincides with muscle repair, regeneration, and growth, which involve activation and proliferation of satellite cells, followed by their terminal differentiation. Recent investigations have begun to explore the relationship between inflammatory cell functions and skeletal muscle injury and repair by using genetically modified animal models, antibody depletions of specific inflammatory cell populations, or expression profiling of inflamed muscle after injury. These studies have contributed to a complex picture in which inflammatory cells promote both injury and repair, through the combined actions of free radicals, growth factors, and chemokines. In this review, recent discoveries concerning the interactions between skeletal muscle and inflammatory cells are presented. New findings clearly show a role for neutrophils in promoting muscle damage soon after muscle injury or modified use. No direct evidence is yet available to show that neutrophils play a beneficial role in muscle repair or regeneration. Macrophages have also been shown capable of promoting muscle damage in vivo and in vitro through the release of free radicals, although other findings indicate that they may also play a role in muscle repair and regeneration through growth factors and cytokine-mediated signaling. However, this role for macrophages in muscle regeneration is still not definitive; other cells present in muscle can also produce the potentially regenerative factors, and it remains to be proven whether macrophage-derived factors are essential for muscle repair or regeneration in vivo. New evidence also shows that muscle cells can release positive and negative regulators of inflammatory cell invasion, and thereby play an active role in modulating the inflammatory process. In particular, muscle-derived nitric oxide can inhibit inflammatory cell invasion of healthy muscle and protect muscle from lysis by inflammatory cells in vivo and in vitro. On the other hand, muscle-derived cytokines can signal for inflammatory cell invasion, at least in vitro. The immediate challenge for advancing our current understanding of the relationships between muscle and inflammatory cells during muscle injury and repair is to place what has been learned in vitro into the complex and dynamic in vivo environment.

skeletal muscle; macrophage; neutrophil; muscle injury; muscle inflammation

In this review, recent findings are presented that enable us to distinguish between inflammatory processes that disrupt muscle homeostasis and processes that promote muscle repair and regeneration after modified muscle use or injury. In addition, current information concerning muscle-derived mediators that promote or inhibit the invasion of inflammatory cells are discussed. The general picture that emerges from these studies is that neutrophils and macrophages dominate a basic inflammatory response in muscle that follows modified use or injury. Thus far, experimental data show that neutrophils promote muscle damage after modified use, but experimental evidence for a neutrophil function in muscle repair has not yet been attained. Macrophages can promote either muscle injury or proliferation in vitro, although their role in vivo after muscle injury remains poorly understood. Collectively, recent findings show that whether the inflammatory process has an overall beneficial or detrimental effect on muscle function is influenced by the magnitude of the response, the previous history of muscle use, and possibly injury-specific interactions between muscle and the invading inflammatory cells.

	NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE INJURY IN VIVO

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
Neutrophils are rapid invaders of muscle after increased muscle loading or acute injury. Within 1 h of increased muscle use, neutrophil invasion begins (8, 23), after which their concentrations can remain elevated for periods as long as 5 days (23). Morphological observations indicate that the invading neutrophils may be phagocytic (54), but they also have the ability to release proteases that can help degrade cellular debris that may be produced by muscle damage. However, as part of neutrophil activation that leads to proteolysis and removal of debris, they can also release high concentrations of cytolytic and cytotoxic molecules that can damage muscle or other healthy bystander tissues (91). The extent to which these bystander effects can contribute to muscle damage during modified muscle use or injury is just beginning to be understood.

The role of neutrophils in damaging healthy muscle tissue has been demonstrated in response to several perturbations, although their role in muscle damage that occurs during reperfusion after ischemia has been most thoroughly examined (25, 34, 41). Most inflammatory cell-mediated damage during muscle reperfusion occurs within the first few hours of reperfusion (60), and depletion of neutrophils before ischemia-reperfusion injury (I/R) of muscle can reduce histologically discernible muscle damage by nearly 40% (42, 47, 49). Similarly, muscle activation during restricted blood flow, which produces contractile claudication, apparently causes neutrophil-mediated muscle damage (44). In both of these models, there is release of cytosolic proteins from the muscle, which indicates that the muscle membrane may be a target of injury by neutrophils. However, correlations between the invasion of neutrophils into muscle and the peak occurrence of indicators of muscle membrane injury are not observed in all investigations (56), which may reflect differences in the relative importance of mechanically induced lesions and neutrophil-induced lesions in different models of muscle injury.

Neutrophil-mediated damage to muscle can also cause defects in muscle contractility. This has been most convincingly demonstrated in muscle experiencing I/R injury where neutrophil-depleted animals showed significantly less decrease in peak isometric tension caused by the injury than occurred in nondepleted animals (93). Rat soleus muscle also shows a significant decrease in power when rats are subjected to 10 days of muscle unloading followed by 2 h reloading caused by return to normal ambulation (27), although it is controversial whether neutrophils could also contribute to this defect. The controversy has centered on conflicting conclusions concerning whether neutrophils invade muscle after 2 h of reloading, as has been shown to occur in many other models of muscle injury caused by modified loading (8, 23, 43, 44, 55, 89). Initially, Frenette et al. (26) showed a significant 60% increase in neutrophil invasion after 2 h of reloading, leading the investigators to conclude that neutrophils could potentially contribute to muscle injury at this early stage of reloading. In that study, the investigators identified neutrophils using a monoclonal antibody for which specificity was confirmed experimentally (26). In a subsequent investigation, Frenette et al. (27) examined neutrophil invasion in the same experimental model and again sampled at 2 h of reloading but concluded that neutrophils did not invade by that time. However, in this second analysis the investigators used an antibody that recognized all granulocytes, and they analyzed fewer animals and obtained a much larger SE in their data. Nevertheless, this second investigation showed an 50% increase in the number of granulocytes in the muscle at 2 h of reloading, but the difference did not reach statistical significance, primarily because of a relatively large SE. Thus the preponderant data indicate that neutrophils are present when defects in force production occur in this model; it still remains to be tested whether they contribute to the defects.

Whether neutrophils promote muscle damage that is caused by eccentric contractions is also controversial and may reflect a greater difficulty in resolving the neutrophil's contribution to injury against the extensive mechanical damage that can be produced in muscle that undergoes lengthening contractions. Recent evidence has shown that administration of an antibody that blocks the respiratory burst and degranulation of neutrophils prior to lengthening contractions also produces large reductions in microscopically discernable muscle damage (13). However, a previous investigation showed that there was no difference in muscle injury in the muscles of neutropenic and nonneutropenic mice subjected to eccentric contractions (54). Part of the apparent discrepancy concerning the role of neutrophils in these injuries may result from differences in the treatments used to produce injury; Lowe et al. (54) used 150 lengthening contractions, whereas Brickson et al. (13) used a single eccentric contraction. The more extensive damage that could result from the more extreme protocol (54) could obfuscate neutrophil-mediated injury. In addition, differences in the technique to assay for damage may also produce different interpretations. Previous studies have shown that under at least some conditions, injuries that produce extensive morphological damage may cause little decrement in force production (83), which indicates that assaying for muscle injury by testing for defects in force production may not always be the most sensitive assay. Finally, activation of neutrophils to release cytolytic molecules depends at least to some extent on the type and intensity of exercise, with moderate exercise increasing activation and intense exercise potentially suppressing activation (70, 77).

	MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL-MEDIATED DAMAGE TO MUSCLE

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
Current findings show that neutrophils are capable of direct lysis of muscle cell membranes through a superoxide-dependent mechanism. Cytotoxicity assays in which muscle cells were cocultured with activated neutrophils showed that neutrophil lysis of muscle cells could be largely prevented by addition of superoxide dismutase (SOD) (67). These in vitro observations are consistent with findings using the I/R model of muscle injury, in which systemic administration of SOD can produce large decreases in muscle damage (80). Recent findings also implicate neutrophil-derived superoxide in lysis of muscle membranes that is caused by modified muscle use in the rodent hindlimb muscle unloading/reloading model (68). In that investigation, the effects of null mutation of gp91^phox on muscle membrane lysis caused by muscle unloading/reloading were assessed. Gp91^phox is the catalytic subunit of NADPH oxidase, which is required for superoxide generation by neutrophils (76). Muscle membrane lysis during muscle reloading was nearly completely prevented by the gp91^phox mutation, showing that superoxide or a superoxide-derivative was essential for most muscle membrane damage in this model.

Although neutrophil-generated superoxide plays a major role in the lysis of muscle membranes in vitro, after I/R or during modified muscle loading, superoxide itself is not likely to cause direct membrane damage in these models. Superoxide is only a mild oxidant that can be rapidly removed by reaction with other free radicals or by conversion to hydrogen peroxide by SOD (35). Hydrogen peroxide is a stronger oxidant than superoxide and has the capacity to peroxidize lipids and damage cell membranes (35). However, hydrogen peroxide can also be rapidly converted in vivo to more highly reactive free radicals or nonradical oxidants, including hydroxyl radicals and hypochlorous acid, depending on the presence of other reactants, enzymes, and transition metals. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) is particularly important in determining the fate of hydrogen peroxide because it can consume hydrogen peroxide to generate hypochlorous acid more rapidly than hydroxyl radicals are produced from hydrogen peroxide in a competing reaction (99). MPO can also compete successfully with catalase, which converts hydrogen peroxide to benign water and oxygen. Thus modulation of the expression or activity of MPO can play an important role in determining whether superoxide production leads to the production of potentially lytic, nonradical oxidants.

MPO is expressed primarily by neutrophils, and increased muscle loading or injury typically produces an early increase in MPO activity in muscle that reflects neutrophil invasion. Part of the increase in MPO in muscle extracts after exercise or injury may reflect an increase in neutrophils in the vasculature in the muscle, because exercise causes demargination of neutrophils, so that circulating populations increase (65). Exercise or muscle injury also causes increased degranulation of neutrophils, leading to the release of active MPO into the serum (8,14). However, histological evidence shows that much of the increase in MPO concentration in muscle after exercise or injury is attributable to neutrophil extravasation into the muscle. Recent findings have also shown that the level of MPO activity per neutrophil is increased by exercise (85), which indicates increased muscle loading or some associated variable during exercise can elevate the expression of MPO. The net effect of this exercise-induced shift to higher levels of MPO activity could be to shift neutrophils to a more cytolytic, hypochlorous acid-generating state (85). Thus exercise increases neutrophils in circulation and in injured muscle and increases their cytolytic capacity.

Although muscle injury or increased muscle loading can increase the activation, extravasation, and cytotoxicity of neutrophils, the extent to which neutrophils damage muscle is governed by the redox environment in the muscle. Much of the chemistry that affects the relative cytotoxicity of neutrophil-derived free radicals and nonradical oxidants occurs in the extracellular space, where reactants contributed by other cells are also present. The contribution of muscle-derived reactants can be especially important in injuries that result from modified muscle use, because exercise and modified muscle use can increase the release of free radicals by muscle (58). For example, muscle contraction can cause increased release of superoxide (46, 58, 78) and hydroxyl radicals (74), either of which can react with MPO to generate more cytotoxic reactants. Increased muscle use can also increase SOD activity in muscle (38), which could lead to an increase in MPO-mediated cytotoxicity, but can also elevate catalase activity (92), which could compete with MPO to reduce neutrophil-mediated damage. A further level of complexity is added by findings which show that the history of muscle use also affects the level of expression of enzymes that are involved in free radical production. For example, modified muscle use can affect the level of expression of both SOD and nitric oxide synthase (NOS) (38, 45, 66, 73, 90). Thus the extent to which neutrophils promote muscle injury will be determined in part by the history of muscle use, the intensity or severity of the modified use that causes neutrophil invasion, the acute use of muscle at the time of injury, and the numbers and state of activation of the invading neutrophils.

	DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO MUSCLE REPAIR OR REMODELING?

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
A likely role of neutrophils in muscle repair or remodeling is the oxidative or proteolytic modification of damaged tissue, to allow phagocytosis of debris by neutrophils or macrophages. The extent to which this processing and removal of damaged muscle by neutrophils or other phagocytes is required for muscle repair is not known, although some observations indicate that it may be a significant component of muscle regeneration. Muscle regeneration is slower in older animals, which coincides with slowed phagocytosis by inflammatory cells (32, 102). In addition, mouse strains with slower rates of phagocytic removal of muscle debris show slower rates of muscle regeneration (32). These correlations support the expectation that phagocytosis is a necessary feature of muscle repair, although other age- or strain-related factors could also influence other aspects of the regenerative response. In addition, these correlative findings do not distinguish the contribution of neutrophils from other phagocytes, such as macrophages, that are also present. More recently, muscle regeneration has been reported to be slower after injury by snake toxin if phagocytes were first depleted from the animals by intraperitoneal injections of antisera to neutrophils and monocytes (87). The animals depleted of neutrophils and monocytes also showed more tissue debris in injured muscles, which suggested the possibility that the impaired capacity to remove tissue debris by phagocytes could slow the regenerative process.

Could it be that neutrophil-mediated damage to muscle cell membranes is also a necessary feature of muscle growth or repair? Most assays for muscle injury after muscle injury or modified use have equated muscle membrane lysis with muscle injury. For example, measurements of the loss of muscle cytosolic proteins into the serum or the presence of extracellular marker dyes in the muscle cytoplasm have been used to quantify relative levels of muscle damage, although it is feasible that some active transport of membrane-injury marker molecules may occur. Recently, experimental reductions in neutrophil invasion into injured muscle (44) or neutrophil production of free radical oxidants (68) have shown that neutrophils are directly or indirectly involved in muscle membrane damage in at least some models of muscle injury. However, teleological arguments have been made to state that neutrophil-mediated disruptions of the muscle membrane may be necessary for muscle growth and adaptation to increased loading. This possibility has been tested recently in the muscle unloading/reloading model. During the reloading of the soleus muscle, neutrophils invade the muscle, and there is an increase in muscle membrane lysis, which is followed by a period of muscle growth as it adapts to reloading. Muscle unloading/reloading of gp91^phox null mice showed that muscle membrane lysis was prevented by the null mutation, but the rate of muscle growth during the reloading period was not affected by the absence of membrane damage (68). Thus neutrophil-mediated damage of the muscle cell membrane is not required for muscle growth, at least in this model of modified muscle use. Whether they play a role in muscle repair that is independent of growth or phagocytosis is unknown.

	WHAT ARE THE ROLES OF MACROPHAGES IN MODIFIED MUSCLE USE?

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
Currently, we have a poor understanding of the functions of macrophages that invade muscle after injury or modified muscle use. Predictably, their roles in influencing the course of muscle injury or remodeling are more complex than the role of neutrophils, because macrophages are rich sources of diverse growth factors and cytokines, as well as free radicals. Macrophages are also professional antigen-presenting cells, so they can play important roles in regulating the cellular immune response to injured muscle.

Macrophages can injure muscle cells in vitro and in vivo. Cytotoxicity assays have shown that macrophages lyse target muscle cells by a nitric oxide (NO)-dependent, superoxide-independent mechanism and that their cytolytic capacity is increased by the presence of neutrophils (67). Furthermore, the presence of muscle cells increases NO production by macrophages, suggesting that there may be a positive-feedback mechanism promoting lysis, in which initial muscle damage promotes increased NO-mediated toxicity by macrophages (67). Macrophages also increase muscle membrane lysis in vivo in the mdx mouse model of muscular dystrophy. Mdx mice, which are null mutants for the membrane-associated protein called dystrophin, experience an increased susceptibility to mechanical damage to the cell membrane during muscle contraction, which leads to muscle inflammation and membrane lysis (75). However, depletion of macrophages from mdx mice by intraperitoneal injections of a macrophage-specific antibody resulted in an 80% reduction in muscle membrane lysis in vivo (97). This finding shows that macrophages can play a major role in promoting muscle damage, after muscle injuries that are expected to occur through mechanical damage. Whether macrophages can similarly promote membrane damage in nondiseased muscle has not been demonstrated. On the contrary, macrophage invasion of muscles experiencing reloading after unloading is not necessary for the formation of muscle membrane lesions that occur during the reloading period (89).

Several observations indicate a potentially important role for macrophages in promoting muscle repair and remodeling after injury or modified use. Part of the contribution of macrophages to repair processes may rely on their removal of debris after injury. The first macrophages to invade rat skeletal muscle after injury are a phagocytic phenotype that is present at highest concentrations at sites where tissue damage is most apparent (39, 59) (Fig. 1) and then decline in number at the end of the phagocytic stage (82). Although phagocytic macrophages appear to contribute to removal of cellular debris, it is not known whether removal of debris is required for repair or whether macrophages are important contributors to the removal of debris.

View larger version (153K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Cross-sections of rat soleus muscle after a 10-day period of unloading and subsequent 24 h of reloading by normal, voluntary ambulation. Nonphagocytic macrophages that are immunolabeled (anti-ED2) and appear reddish-brown are distributed throughout the connective tissue between muscle fibers. Frequently, the nonphagocytic macrophages appear in close apposition to the surface of muscle fibers in the reloaded muscle, which has contributed to the expectation that they play a role in promoting growth and repair. Inset: phagocytic macrophages are immunolabeled (anti-ED1) in reloaded skeletal muscle, some of which have invaded a necrotic fiber. Bar, 60 µm.

Expression profiling of muscles subjected to injury by a series of tetanic contractions has also revealed that heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor (HB-EGF) may also be a macrophage-derived factor that can influence muscle repair (20). HB-EGF is secreted by macrophages (64) and muscle (19), and it may function to increase muscle cell survival during oxidative stress (40).

Surprisingly, expression profiling of injured muscle has not shown a significant increase in TNF-, although macrophages are a relatively rich source of TNF- and there is evidence to implicate TNF- in affecting muscle repair. TNF- appears at elevated levels in muscle soon after injury (22, 95). In addition, TNF receptor null mutant mice that were subjected to muscle injury caused by freezing showed significantly lower levels of MyoD expression than observed in injured wild-type muscle (84). The potential functional importance of TNF- in muscle repair is emphasized by the observation that recovery of muscle strength after freeze injury was significantly impaired in TNF receptor null mice and in mice treated with neutralizing anti-TNF- compared with injured wild-type mice (95). However, the strength deficits were apparent only at later stages of repair; muscle strength did not differ significantly between wild-type and TNF receptor null mice at 5 days postinjury, but at 13 days, the null mutants were significantly weaker. This delayed influence of the null mutation of the TNF receptor on muscle recovery after injury may reflect that TNF-mediated processes are most important in later stages of repair. Although these reports provide strong evidence that TNF can play a role in muscle repair after injury, no defects in muscle repair or regeneration were reported in TNF- null mutant mice after a muscle crush injury (22). Furthermore, TNF- can stimulate muscle wasting through a NF-B-mediated process (51). In addition, analyses of muscle inflammation and injury in dystrophin-deficient mdx mice that were also null mutants for TNF- showed that absence of TNF- increased the rate of necrosis and regeneration in the early stages of the disease (81) but ultimately improved muscle recovery and function at later stages (31). Collectively, these findings show that the role of TNF- in muscle injury or regeneration may vary with the type, severity, location, and stage of the injury.

Although the identity of macrophage-derived factors that influence muscle growth or regeneration in vivo remains a mystery, indirect evidence continues to accumulate to support the existence of those factors. In a recent interesting investigation, Bondesen et al. (11) found that null mutation of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) or treatment with COX-2-specific inhibitors significantly reduced the rate of muscle regeneration and myoblast proliferation after injury. Although loss of COX-2 activity could possibly affect the regenerative capacity of muscle directly, it also has an anti-inflammatory effect. These investigators observed that COX-2 null mutation reduced the numbers of macrophages in injured muscle during regeneration, which suggested that the reduction in macrophage numbers may underlie the defect in muscle growth and regeneration. These observations and interpretation are consistent with several previous studies in which nonspecific COX inhibitors were reported to slow muscle repair after injury (5, 63, 72).

	INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND INFLAMMATORY CELLS ARE IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING THE COURSE OF MUSCLE INJURY AND REMODELING

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 
Recent investigations have provided new insights into specific mechanisms through which both satellite cells and muscle fibers can regulate extravasation of inflammatory cells and modulate inflammatory cell contribution to muscle injury or growth. Muscle-derived NO appears to be a particularly important regulator of muscle inflammation and muscle damage by invading inflammatory cells (Table 1). In vitro studies have shown that muscle-derived NO reduces neutrophil-mediated lysis of muscle cells and decreases superoxide concentration in the media (67). This protective effect could occur by NO scavenging of superoxide to prevent its conversion to a more cytotoxic oxidant (79) or by inhibiting the activity of NADPH oxidase, so that superoxide production was reduced (21). Muscle-derived NO may also serve to protect muscle from damage by inflammatory cells by inhibiting the expression of adhesion molecules that are necessary for leukocyte interactions with the vascular endothelium (1, 2, 4, 30, 71). At least part of the strong inhibitory effect of NO on leukocyte adhesion to endothelia is attributable to NO inhibition of transcriptional activation of the intercellular adhesion molecule promoter (9), a protein that is necessary for firm adhesion of leukocytes to the vascular wall.

Changes in NOS expression and activity in healthy muscle can also influence muscle inflammation and inflammatory cell-mediated damage. Because NOS expression and activity in muscle are positively regulated by muscle contraction and exercise (6, 90), healthy muscle may be more able to prevent the invasion of potentially cytolytic inflammatory cells. However, removal of normal muscle loading causes a decrease in the expression and activity of nNOS in muscle (90), which could then render the muscle more susceptible to invasion by inflammatory cells. This scenario has received recent experimental support. Expression of a muscle-specific nNOS transgene in mice that were subjected to hindlimb muscle unloading followed by reloading prevented the invasion of neutrophils into muscle during the reloading period, although macrophage invasion was not affected (69). In addition, muscle membrane lesions that occurred in wild-type muscle during reloading did not occur in the reloaded, NOS transgenic muscles. These findings suggest that muscle-derived NO is a negative regulator of neutrophil invasion and also support the view that muscle membrane lesions are caused by neutrophils in this model.

Muscle can also release factors that promote inflammatory cell invasion, particularly macrophages, which may help promote muscle repair. Recently, human satellite cells were shown to release factors that attracted macrophages/monocytes through an endothelial layer in vitro (18). Interestingly, chemoattractiveness of these myogenic cells was highest immediately after they were activated to proliferate and then declined as the muscle cells exited the cell cycle and began to differentiate. In an injury context, this could indicate that activated satellite cells could signal for the rapid, early invasion of macrophages immediately after an injury. In this in vitro model, the investigators showed that nearly 80% of the muscle-derived chemotaxis of macrophages could be blocked by coapplication of neutralizing antibodies to monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC), fractalkine (FKN), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), urokinase type plasminogen-activator receptor (µPAR), and urokinase (µPA). Expression profiling studies of injured muscle have also shown that µPAR-1 (20) and MCP-1 receptor (7) expression are elevated after muscle injury, which supports the possibility of functionally significant signaling via these molecules during muscle inflammation in vivo. The observation that µPAR-1 and its ligand µPA are involved in macrophage chemoattraction to satellite cells in vivo is especially engaging, because µPA null mutant mice show defects in muscle regeneration in vivo that accompany reductions in leukocyte invasion into the muscle (53).

The elevated expression of MCP-1 in muscle soon after injury and its ability to serve as a muscle-derived chemoattractant to macrophages in vitro have contributed to a growing interest in chemokines in regulating communication between muscle and macrophages after injury. Because of overlapping functions of chemokines involved in the inflammatory response, dissecting their individual or synergistic roles in vivo is difficult. However, interesting and promising new work by Simeonova and colleagues (96) has provided strong evidence for a functionally significant role for MCP-1 and other chemokines in muscle repair. Using a freeze injury model, muscle repair and inflammation were studied in mice that were null mutants for chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) and rendered MCP-1 deficient by injection of neutralizing antibodies to MCP-1. These mutant/depleted animals were found to have a greatly slowed recovery from muscle injury than wild-type animals, using muscle force production as an index of recovery. In contrast with in vitro studies that showed a significant role for MCP-1 signaling in chemoattraction of macrophages to muscle (18), qualitative observations of CCR5 mutant/MCP-1 deficient animals showed no obvious reduction in the concentration of inflammatory cells after injury (96). Thus the role of MCP-1 in regulating interactions between muscle and macrophages may differ between in vitro and in vivo models, or the more complex in vivo environment may provide other factors that compensate for the loss of MCP-1-mediated chemoattraction for macrophages. There is little doubt that the complexity of the systems through which muscle and inflammatory cells communicate will continue to grow as new mediators are identified and as they are analyzed in the complex in vivo environment (Fig. 2).

View larger version (95K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Schematic of potential mediators of inflammatory cell interactions with injured muscle. Experimental observations that support the potential interactions between neutrophils, macrophages, and muscle are discussed in the text. Neutrophils are shown as having potential role in promoting injury or repair, although their role in promoting repair in injured muscle is speculative. NO, nitric oxide; µPAR, urokinase type plasminogen-activator receptor; µPA, urokinase; MCP-1, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1; FKN, fractalkine; MDC, macrophage-derived chemokine; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor; SOD, superoxide dismutase; MPO, myeloperoxidase.

	CONCLUSIONS

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

Recent experimental findings have also shown that macrophages can promote muscle injury in vivo, at least in muscular dystrophy. However, a large body of in vitro data and in vivo observations associate macrophages with muscle regeneration and growth after muscle injury or modified use. Clearly, macrophages can release factors in vitro that promote muscle growth. They are also present in vivo at sites where repair occurs. However, there are no definitive findings to show which factors, if any, are released by macrophages in vivo that affect the process of muscle repair. If these pro-regenerative, macrophage-derived molecules can be shown to be functionally important in vivo, they may prove to be important therapeutic agents in the treatment of muscular dystrophies, cachexia, or other muscle-wasting conditions.

	FOOTNOTES

 

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: J. G. Tidball, Dept. of Physiological Science, 5833 Life Science Bldg., Univ. of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095 (E-mail: jtidball{at}physci.ucla.edu)

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT NEUTROPHILS CAN PROMOTE MUSCLE... MECHANISMS OF NEUTROPHIL... DO NEUTROPHILS CONTRIBUTE TO... WHAT ARE THE ROLES... INTERACTIONS BETWEEN MUSCLE AND... CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

 

1. Adams MR, Jessup W, Hailstones D, and Celermajer DS. L-Arginine reduces human monocyte adhesion to vascular endothelium and endothelial expression of cell adhesion molecules. Circulation 95: 662–668, 1997.
2. Akimitsu T, Gute DC, and Korthuis RJ. Leukocyte adhesion induced by inhibition of nitric oxide production in skeletal muscle. J Appl Physiol 78: 1725–1732, 1995.
3. Albina JE, Cui S, Mateo RB, and Reichner JS. Nitric oxide-mediated apoptosis in murine peritoneal macrophages. J Immunol 150: 5080–5085, 1993.
4. Aljada A, Saadeh R, Assian E, Ghanim H, and Dandona P. Insulin inhibits the expression of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 by human aortic endothelial cells through stimulation of nitric oxide. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85: 2572–2575, 2000.
5. Almekinders LC and Gilbert JA. Healing of experimental muscle strains and the effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication. Am J Sports Med 14: 303–308, 1986.
6. Balon TW and Nadler JL. Nitric oxide release is present from incubated skeletal muscle preparations. J Appl Physiol 77: 2519–2521, 1994.
7. Barash IA, Mathew L, Ryan AF, Chen J, and Lieber RL. Rapid muscle-specific gene expression changes after a single bout of eccentric contractions in the mouse. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 286: C355–C364, 2004.
8. Belcastro AN, Arthur GD, Albisser TA, and Raj DA. Heart, liver, and skeletal muscle myeloperoxidase activity during exercise. J Appl Physiol 80: 1331–1335, 1996.
9. Berendji-Grun D, Kolb-Bachofen V, and Kroncke KD. Nitric oxide inhibits endothelial IL-1-induced Icam-1 gene expression at the transcriptional level decreasing Sp1 and AP-1 activity. Mol Med 7: 748–754, 2001.
10. Blaylock MG, Cuthertson BH, Galley HF, Ferguson NR, and Webster NR. The effect of nitric oxide and peroxynitrite on apoptosis in human polymorphonuclear leukocytes. Free Radic Biol Med 25: 748–752, 1998.
11. Bondesen BA, Mills ST, Kegley KM, and Pavlath GK. The COX-2 pathway is essential during early stages of skeletal muscle regeneration. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 287: C475–C483, 2004.
12. Brenman HE, Chao DS, Sia H, Aldape K, and Bredt DS. Nitric oxide synthase complexed with dystrophin and absent from skeletal muscle sarcolemma in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Cell 82: 743–752, 1995.
13. Brickson S, Ji LL, Olabisi R, Schneider BSP, and Best TM. M1/70 attenuates blood-borne neutrophil oxidants, activation, and myofiber damage following stretch injury. J Appl Physiol 95: 969–976, 2003.
14. Bury TB and Pirnay F. Effect of prolonged exercise on neutrophil myeloperoxidase secretion. Int J Sports Med 16: 410–412, 1995.
15. Cantini M and Carraro U. Macrophage-released factor stimulates selectively myogenic cells in primary muscle culture. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 54: 121–128, 1995.
16. Cantini M, Giurisato E, Radu C, Tiozzo S, Pampinella F, Senigaglia D, Zaniolo G, Mazzoleni, and Vittiello L. Macrophage-secreted myogenic factors: a promising tool for greatly enhancing the proliferative capacity of myoblasts in vitro and in vivo. Neurol Sci 23: 189–194, 2002.
17. Chang WJ, Iannaccone ST, Lau KS, Masters BSS, McCabe TJ, McMillan K, Padre RC, Spencer MJ, Tidball JG, and Stull JT. Neuronal nitric oxide synthase and dystrophin-deficient muscular dystrophy. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 9142–9147, 1996.
18. Chazaud B, Sonnet C, Lafuste P, Bassez G, Rimaniol AC, Poron F, Authier FJ, Dreyfus PA, and Gherardi RK. Satellite cells attract monocytes and use macrophages as a support to escape apoptosis and enhance muscle growth. J Cell Biol 163: 1133–1143, 2003.
19. Chen X, Raab G, Deutsch U, Zhang J, Ezzell RM, and Klagsbrun M. Induction of heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor expression during myogensis. Activation of the gene by MyoD and localization of the transmembrane form of the protein on the myotube surface. J Biol Chem 270: 18285–18294, 1995.
20. Chen YW, Nader GA, Baar KR, Fedele MJ, Hoffman EP, and Esser KA. Response of rat muscle to acute resistance exercise defined by transcriptional and translational profiling. J Physiol 545: 27–41, 2002.
21. Clancy RM, Leszczynska-Piziak J, and Abramson SB. Nitric oxide, an endothelial cell relaxation factor, inhibits neutrophil superoxide anion production via a direct action on the NADPH oxidase. J Clin Invest 90: 1116–1121, 1992.
22. Collins RA and Grounds MD. The role of tumor necrosis factor- (TNF-) in skeletal muscle regeneration. Studies in TNF-(–/–) and TNF-(–/–)/LT-(–/–) mice. J Histochem Cytochem 49: 989–1001, 2001.
23. Fielding RA, Manfredi TJ, Ding W, Fiatarone MA, Evans WJ, and Cannon JG. Acute phase response in exercise. III. Neutrophil and IL-1 accumulation in skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 265: R166–R172, 1993.
24. Filvaroff EH, Ebner R, and Derynck R. Inhibition of myogenic differentiation in myoblasts expressing a truncated type II TGF-beta receptor. Development 120: 1085–1095, 1994.
25. Formigli L, Lombardo L, Adembri C, Brunelleschi S, Ferrari E, and Novelli G. Neutrophils as mediators of human skeletal muscle ischemia-reperfusion syndrome. Hum Pathol 23: 627–634, 1992.
26. Frenette J, Cai B, and Tidball JG. Complement activation promotes muscle inflammation during modified muscle use. Am J Pathol 156: 2103–2110, 2000.
27. Frenette J, St-Pierre M, Cote C, Mylona E, and Pizza F. Muscle impairment occurs rapidly and precedes inflammatory cell accumulation after mechanical loading. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 282: R351–R357, 2002.
28. Fujii H, Ichimori K, Hoshiai K, and Nakazawa H. Nitric oxide inactivates NADPH oxidase in pig neutrophils by inhibiting its assembling process. J Biol Chem 272: 32773–32778, 1997.
29. Fukumura D, Yuan F, Endo M, and Jain RK. Role of nitric oxide in tumor microcirculation. Blood flow, vascular permeability, and leukocyte-endothelial interactions. Am J Pathol 150: 713–725, 1997.
30. Gauthier TW, Davenpeck KL, and Lefer AM. Nitric oxide attenuates leukocyte-endothelial interaction via P-selectin in splanchnic ischemia-reperfusion. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 267: G562–G568, 1994.
31. Gosselin LE, Barkley JE, Spencer MJ, McCormick KM, and Farkas GA. Ventilatory dysfunction in mdx mice: impact of tumor necrosis factor-alpha deletion. Muscle Nerve 28: 336–343, 2003.
32. Grounds MD. Phagocytosis of necrotic muscle in muscle isografts is influenced by the strain, age, and sex of host mice. J Pathol 153: 71–82, 1987.
33. Gupta MP, Evanoff V, and Hart CM. Nitric oxide attenuates hydrogen peroxide-mediated injury to porcine pulmonary artery endothelial cells. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 272: L1133–L1141, 1997.
34. Gute DC, Ishida T, Yarimizu K, and Korthuis RJ. Inflammatory responses to ischemia and reperfusion in skeletal muscle. Mol Cell Biochem 179: 169–187, 1998.
35. Hampton MB, Kettle AJ, and Winterbourn CC. Inside the neutrophil phagosome: oxidants, myeloperoxidase, and bacterial killing. Blood 92: 3007–3017, 1998.
36. Hickner RC, Fisher JS, Ehsani AA, and Kohrt WM. Role of nitric oxide in skeletal muscle blood flow at rest and during dynamic exercise in humans. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 273: H405–H410, 1997.
37. Hirai T, Visneski MD, Kearns KJ, Zelis R, and Musch TI. Effects of NO synthase inhibition on the muscular blood flow response to treadmill exercise in rats. J Appl Physiol 77: 1288–1293, 1994.
38. Hollander J, Fiebig R, Gore M, Ookawara T, Ohno H, and Ji LL. Superoxide dismutase gene expression is activated by a single bout of exercise in rat skeletal muscle. Pflügers Arch 442: 426–434, 2001.
39. Honda H, Kimura H, and Rostami A. Demonstration and phenotypic characterization of resident macrophages in rat skeletal muscle. Immunology 70: 272–277, 1990.
40. Horikawa M, Higashiyama S, Nomura S, Kitamura Y, Ishikawa M, and Taniguchi N. Upregulation of endogenous heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor and its role as a survival factor in skeletal myotubes. FEBS Lett 459: 100–104, 1999.
41. Jolly SR, Kane WJ, Bailie MB, Abrams GD, and Lucchesi BR. Canine myocardial reperfusion injury. Its reduction by the combined administration of superoxide dismutase and catalase. Circ Res 54: 277–285, 1984.
42. Jolly SR, Kane WJ, Hook BG, Abrams GD, Kunkel SL, and Lucchesi BR. Reduction of myocardial infarct size by neutrophil depletion: effect of duration of occlusion. Am Heart J 112: 682–690, 1986.
43. Judge AR and Dodd SL. Oxidative damage to skeletal muscle following an acute bout of contractile claudication. Atherosclerosis 171: 219–224, 2003.
44. Judge AR and Dodd SL. Xanthine oxidase and activated neutrophils cause oxidative damage to skeletal muscle after contractile claudication. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 286: H252–H256, 2004.
45. Jungersten Ambring A L, Wall B, and Wennmalm . Both physical fitness and acute exercise regulate nitric oxide formation in healthy humans. J Appl Physiol 82: 760–764, 1997.
46. Kolbeck RC, She ZW, Callahan LA, and Nosek TM. Increased superoxide production during fatigue in the perfused rat diaphragm. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 156: 140–145, 1997.
47. Korthuis RJ, Grisham MB, and Granger DN. Leukocyte depletion attenuates vascular injury in postischemic skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 254: H823–H827, 1988.
48. Kosonen O, Kankaanranta H, Uotila J, and Moilanen E. Inhibition by nitric oxide-releasing compounds of E-selectin expression in and neutrophil adhesion to human endothelial cells. Eur J Pharmacol 394: 149–156, 2000.
49. Kyriakides C, Austen W, Wang Y, Favuzza J, Kobzik L, Moore FD, and Hechtman HB. Skeletal muscle reperfusion injury is mediated by neutrophils and the complement membrane attack complex. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 277: C1263–C1268, 1999.
50. Lescaudron L, Peltekian E, Fontaine-Perus J, Paulin D, Zampieri M, Garcia L, and Parrish E. Blood borne macrophages are essential for the triggering of muscle regeneration following muscle transplant. Neuromuscul Disord 9: 72–80, 1999.
51. Li YP, Schwartz RJ, Waddell ID, Holloway BR, and Reid MB. Skeletal muscle myocytes undergo protein loss and reactive oxygen-mediated NF-B activation in response to tumor necrosis factor . FASEB J 12: 871–880, 1998.
52. Liu P, Xu B, Hock CE, Nagele R, Sun FF, and Wong PY. NO modulates P-selectin and ICAM-1 mRNA expression and hemodynamic alterations in hepatic I/R. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 275: H2191–H2198, 1998.
53. Lluis F, Roma J, Suelves M, Parra M, Aniorte G, Gallardo E, Illa I, Rodriguez L, Hughes SM, Carmeliet P, Roig M, and Muñoz-Canoves P. Urokinase-dependent plasminogen activation is required for efficient skeletal muscle regeneration in vivo. Blood 97: 1703–1711, 2001.
54. Lowe DA, Warren GL, Ingalls CP, Boorstein DB, and Armstrong RB. Muscle function and protein metabolism after initiation of eccentric contraction-induced injury. J Appl Physiol 79: 1260–1270, 1995.
55. MacIntyre DL, Sorichter S, Mair J, Berg A, and McKenzie DC. Markers of inflammation and myofibrillar proteins following eccentric exercise in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 84:180–186, 2001.
56. Malm C, Nyberg P, Engstrom M, Sjodin B, Lenkei R, Ekblom B, and Lundberg I. Immunological changes in human skeletal muscle and blood after eccentric exercise and multiple biopsies. J Physiol 529: 243–262, 2000.
57. Massimino M, Rapizzi E, Cantini M, Libera L, Mazzoeni F, Arsian P, and Carraro U. ED2+ macrophages increase selectively myoblast proliferation in muscle cultures. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 235: 754–759, 1997.
58. McArdle A, Pattwell D, Vasilaki A, Griffiths RD, and Jackson MJ,. Contractile activity-induced oxidative stress: cellular origin and adaptive responses. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 280: C621–C627, 2001.
59. McLennan IS. Resident macrophages (ED2- and ED3-positive) do not phagocytose degenerating rat skeletal muscle fibres. Cell Tissue Res 272: 193–196, 1993.
60. Merchant SH, Gurule DM, and Larson RS. Amelioration of ischemia-reperfusion injury with cyclic peptide blockade of ICAM-1. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 284: H1260–H1268, 2003.
61. Merly F, Lescaudron L, Rouaud T, Crossin F, and Gardahaut MF. Macrophages enhance muscle satellite cell proliferation and delay their differentiation. Muscle Nerve 22: 724–732, 1999.
62. Miles AM, Bohle DS, Glassbrenner PA, Hansert B, Wink DA, and Grisham MB. Modulation of superoxide-dependent oxidation and hydroxylation reactions by nitric oxide. J Biol Chem 271: 40–47, 1996.
63. Mishra DK, Friden J, Schmitz M, and Lieber RL. Anti-inflammatory medication after muscle injury. J Bone Joint Surg 77: 1410–1519, 1995.
64. Miyagawa J, Higashiyama S, Kawata S, Inui Y, Tamura S, Yamamotok Nishida M, Nakamura T, Yamashita S, Matsuzawa Y, and Taniguchi N. Localization of heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor in smooth muscle cells and macrophages of human atherosclerotic plaques. J Clin Invest 95: 404–411, 1995.
65. Muir AL, Cruz M, Martin BA, Thommasen H, Belzberg A, and Hogg JC. Leukocyte kinetics in the human lung: role of exercise and catecholamines. J Appl Physiol 57: 711–719, 1984.
66. Nakao C, Ookawara T, Kizaki T, Oh-ishi S, Miyazaki H, Haga S, Sato Y, Ji LL, and Ohno H. Effects of swimming training on three superoxide dismutase isoenzymes in mouse tissues. J Appl Physiol 88: 649–654, 2000.
67. Nguyen HX and Tidball JG. Interactions between neutrophils and macrophages promote macrophage killing of muscle cells in vitro. J Physiol 547: 125–132, 2003.
68. Nguyen HX and Tidball JG. Null mutation of gp91^phox reduces muscle membrane lysis during muscle inflammation in mice. J Physiol 553: 833–841, 2003.
69. Nguyen HX and Tidball JG. Expression of a muscle-specific, nitric oxide synthase transgene prevents muscle membrane injury and reduces muscle inflammation during modified muscle use in mice. J Physiol 550: 347–356, 2003.
70. Nieman DC. Immune response to exertion. J Appl Physiol 82:1385–1394, 1997.
71. Niu XF, Smith CW, and Kubes P. Intracellular oxidative stress induced by nitric oxide synthesis inhibition increases endothelial cell adhesion to neutrophils. Circ Res 74: 1133–40, 1994.
72. Obremsky WT, Seaber AV, Ribbeck BM, and Garrett WE Jr. Biomechanical and histologic assessment of a controlled muscle strain injury treated with piroxicam. Am J Sports Med 22: 558–561, 1994.
73. Oh-Ishi S, Kizaki T, Ookawara T, Sakurai T, Izawa T, Nagata N, and Ohno H. Endurance training improves the resistance of rat diaphragm to exercise-induced oxidative stress. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 156: 1579–1585, 1997.
74. O'Neill CA, Stebbins CL, Bonigut S, Halliwell B, and Longhurst JC. Production of hydroxyl radicals in contracting skeletal muscle of cats. J Appl Physiol 81: 1197–1206, 1996.
75. Petrof BJ, Shrager JB, Stedman HH, Kelly AM, and Sweeney HL. Dystrophin protects the sarcolemma from stresses developed during muscle contraction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90: 3710–3714, 1993.
76. Pollock JD, Williams DA, Gifford MAC, Li LL, Du X, Fisherman J, Orkin SH, Doerschuk CM, and Dinauer MC. Mouse model of X-linked chronic granulomatous disease, an inherited defect in phagocyte superoxide production. Nat Genet 9: 202–209, 1995.
77. Pyne DB. Regulation of neutrophil function during exercise. Sports Med 17: 245–258, 1994.
78. Reid MB, Shoji T, Moody MR, and Entman ML. Reactive oxygen in skeletal muscle. II. Extracellular release of free radicals. J Appl Physiol 73: 1805–1809, 1992.
79. Rubanyi GM, Ho EH, Cantor EH, Lumma WC, and Botelho LH. Cytoprotective function of nitric oxide: inactivation of superoxide radicals produced by human leukocytes. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 181: 1392–1397, 1991.
80. Smith J, Grisham M, Granger N, and Korthuis R. Free radical defense mechanisms and neutrophil infiltration in postischemic skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 256: H789–H793, 1989.
81. Spencer MJ, Marino MW, and Winckler WM. Altered pathological progression of diaphragm and quadriceps muscle in TNF-deficient, dystrophin-deficient mice. Neuromuscul Disord 10: 612–619, 2000.
82. St Pierre BA and Tidball JG. Differential response of macrophage subpopulations to soleus muscle reloading after rat hindlimb suspension. J Appl Physiol 77: 290–297, 1994.
83. Street SF. Lateral transmission of tension in frog myofibers: a myofibrillar network and transverse cytoskeletal connections are possible transmitters. J Cell Physiol 114: 346–364, 1983.
84. Summan M, McKinstry M, Warren GL, Hulderman T, Mishra D, Brumbaugh K, Luster MI, and Simeonova PP. Inflammatory mediators and skeletal muscle injury: a DNA microarray analysis. J Interferon Cytokine Res 23: 237–245, 2003.
85. Suzuki K, Sato H, Kikuchi T, Abe T, Nakaji S, Sugawara K, Totsuka M, Sato K, and Yamaya K. Capacity of circulating neutrophils to produce reactive oxygen species after exhaustive exercise. J Appl Physiol 81: 1213–1222, 1996.
86. Suzuki K, Totsuka M, Nakaji S, Yamada M, Kudoh S, Liu Q, Sugawara K, Yamaya K, and Sato K. Endurance exercise causes interaction among stress hormones, cytokines, neutrophil dynamics, and muscle damage. J Appl Physiol 87: 1360–1367, 1999.
87. Teixeira CFP, Zamuner SR, Zuliani JP, Fernandes CM, Cruz-Hofling MA, Fernandes I, Chaves F, and Gutierrez JM. Neutrophils do not contribute to local tissue damage, but play a key role in skeletal muscle regeneration, in mice injected with Bothrops asper snake venom. Muscle Nerve 28: 449–459, 2003.
88. Thomas GD, Sander M, Lau KS, Huang PL, Stull JT, and Victor RG. Impaired metabolic modulation of alpha-adrenergic vasoconstriction in dystrophin-deficient skeletal muscle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 15090–15095, 1998.
89. Tidball JG, Berchenko E, and Frenette J. Macrophage invasion does not contribute to muscle membrane injury during inflammation. J Leukoc Biol 65: 492–498, 1999.
90. Tidball JG, Lavergne E, Lau KS, Spencer MJ, Stull JT, and Wehling M. Mechanical loading regulates nitric oxide synthase expression and activity in developing and adult skeletal muscle. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 275: C260–C266, 1998.
91. Tiidus PM. Radical species in inflammation and overtraining. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 76: 533–538, 1998.
92. Vincent HK, Powers SK, Stewart DJ, Demirel HA, Shanely RA, and Naito H. Short-term exercise training improves diaphragm antioxidant capacity and endurance. Eur J Appl Physiol 81: 67–74, 2000.
93. Walden DL, McCutchan HJ, Enquist EG, Schwappach JR, Shanley PF, Reiss OK, Terada LS, Leff JA, and Repine JE. Neutrophils accumulate and contribute to skeletal muscle dysfunction after ischemia-reperfusion. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 259: H1809–H1812, 1990.
94. Ward C, Wong TH, Murray J, Rahman I, Haslett C, Chilvers ER, and Rossi AG. Induction of human neutrophil apoptosis by nitric oxide donors: evidence for a caspase-dependent, cyclic-GMP-independent, mechanism. Biochem Pharmacol 59: 305–314, 2000.
95. Warren GL, Hulderman T, Jensen N, McKinstry M, Mishra M, Luster MI, and Simeonova PP. Physiological role of tumor necrosis factor in traumatic muscle injury. FASEB J 16: 1630–1632, 2002.
96. Warren GL, O'Farrell L, Summan M, Hulderman T, Mishra D, Luster MI, Kuziel WA, and Simeonova PP. Role of CC chemokines in skeletal muscle functional restoration after injury. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 286: C1031–C1036, 2004.
97. Wehling M, Spencer MJ, and Tidball JG. A nitric oxide synthase transgene ameliorates muscular dystrophy in mdx mice. J Cell Biol 155: 123–131, 2001.
98. Wilson JR and Kapoor S. Contribution of endothelium-derived relaxing factor to exercise-induced vasodilation in humans. J Appl Physiol 75: 2740–2744, 1993.
99. Winterbourn CC. Myeloperoxidase as an effective inhibitor of hydroxyl radical production. Implications for the oxidative reactions of neutrophils. J Clin Invest 78: 545–550, 1986.
100. Yamaoka J, Kabashima K, Kawanishi M, Toda KI, and Miyachi Y. Cytotoxicity of IFN- and TNF- for vascular endothelial cell is mediated by nitric oxide. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 291: 780–786, 2002.
101. Yan Z, Choi S, Liu X, Zhang M, Schageman JJ, Lee SY, Hart R, Lin L, Thurmond FA, and Williams RS. Highly coordinated gene regulation in mouse skeletal muscle regeneration. J Biol Chem 278: 8826–8836, 2003.
102. Zacks SI and Sheff MF. Age-related impeded regeneration of mouse minced anterior tibial muscle. Muscle Nerve 5: 152–161, 1982.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Yahiaoui, D. Gvozdic, G. Danialou, M. Mack, and B. J. Petrof CC family chemokines directly regulate myoblast responses to skeletal muscle injury J. Physiol., August 15, 2008; 586(16): 3991 - 4004. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Hubal, T. C. Chen, P. D. Thompson, and P. M. Clarkson Inflammatory gene changes associated with the repeated-bout effect Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol, May 1, 2008; 294(5): R1628 - R1637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y Yamamoto, S Nakaji, T Umeda, M Matsuzaka, I Takahashi, M Tanabe, K Danjo, A Kojima, and T Oyama Effects of long-term training on neutrophil function in male university judoists Br. J. Sports Med., April 1, 2008; 42(4): 255 - 259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. C. Lockhart and S. V. Brooks Neutrophil accumulation following passive stretches contributes to adaptations that reduce contraction-induced skeletal muscle injury in mice J Appl Physiol, April 1, 2008; 104(4): 1109 - 1115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. Dennis, B. Przybyla, C. Gurley, P. M. Kortebein, P. Simpson, D. H. Sullivan, and C. A. Peterson Aging alters gene expression of growth and remodeling factors in human skeletal muscle both at rest and in response to acute resistance exercise Physiol Genomics, February 19, 2008; 32(3): 393 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. P. Miles, J. M. Andring, S. D. Pearson, L. K. Gordon, C. Kasper, C. M. Depner, and J. R. Kidd Diurnal variation, response to eccentric exercise, and association of inflammatory mediators with muscle damage variables J Appl Physiol, February 1, 2008; 104(2): 451 - 458. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Louis, U. Raue, Y. Yang, B. Jemiolo, and S. Trappe Time course of proteolytic, cytokine, and myostatin gene expression after acute exercise in human skeletal muscle J Appl Physiol, November 1, 2007; 103(5): 1744 - 1751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]