4.5 Review

Inflection points in sepsis biology: from local defense to systemic organ injury

Publisher

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajplung.00069.2012

Keywords

innate immunity; neutrophil extracellular traps; mast cells; platelets; Toll-like receptor

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL-051856, HL-051854, AI-053194]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Seeley EJ, Matthay MA, Wolters PJ. Inflection points in sepsis biology: from local defense to systemic organ injury. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 303: L355-L363, 2012. First published June 15, 2012; doi:10.1152/ajplung.00069.2012.-Sepsis and septic shock lead to considerable morbidity and mortality in developed and developing countries. Despite advances in understanding the innate immune events that lead to septic shock, molecular therapies based on these advances have failed to improve sepsis mortality. The clinical failure of laboratory-derived therapies may be, in part, due to the pleiotropic consequences of the acute inflammatory response, which is the focus of this review. A brisk response to infecting organism is essential for pathogen containment and eradication. However, systemic spread of inflammation beyond a single focus leads to organ injury and higher mortality. The primary goal of this article is to discuss recent animal-and human-based scientific advances in understanding the host response to infection and to highlight how these defense mechanisms can be locally beneficial but systemically detrimental. There are other factors that determine the severity of sepsis that are beyond the scope of this review, including the virulence of the pathogen and regulation by Toll-like receptors. Specifically, this review focuses on how the effector mechanisms of platelets, mast cells, neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), and the endothelium participate in combating local infections yet can induce organ injury during systemic infection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available