4.6 Article

Pathophysiological contributions of fucosyltransferases in renal ischemia reperfusion injury

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 169, Issue 5, Pages 2648-2652

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.169.5.2648

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01DK54770] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ischemia reperfusion injury (IRI) is a major cause of delayed graft function. Recent studies have shown that selectins play an important role in IRT. Selectins bind to sialylated and fucosylated sLe(x) receptors, and two enzymes, fucosyltransferase IV (FucT-IV) and VII (FucT-VII), are important in the function of these receptors. We hypothesized that fucosyltransferase (FucT) enzymes were important pathophysiologic mediators of renal IRI We therefore evaluated renal 1111 in mice deficient in FucT-IV, FucT-VH, and both FucT-IV and FucT-VH and compared their renal function, tubular injury, selectin ligand expression, and neutrophil infiltration to those in wild-type control mice. Bilateral 30-min renal IRI was performed, and the results demonstrated that mice deficient in both FucT-IV/FucT-VII were significantly protected from renal IRI at 24 and 48 h compared with wild-type control mice. FucT-IV-deficient mice showed only modest protection from renal injury at 24 h. However, FucT-VII-deficient mice had similar injury as wild-type mice. Histological analysis of kidney tissue postischemia revealed that mice deficient in both FucT-IV and FucT-VH had significantly reduced tubular injury compared with wild-type mice. Selectin ligand expression increased postischemia. in wild-type, but not FucT-IV/FucT-VII-deficient, mice. Neutrophil infiltration in postischemic kidneys of FucT-IV/FucT-VII-deficient mice was also attenuated. These data demonstrate that fucosyltransferases are important in the pathogenesis of renal IRI and are potential therapeutic targets.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available