4.0 Article

Adrenaline attenuates the acute lung injury after intratracheal lipopolysaccharide instillation: An experimental study

期刊

INHALATION TOXICOLOGY
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 445-453

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08958370801903891

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endotoxin is a major cause of endotoxinemia, sepsis, and pneumonia due to gram-negative bacteria. Experimental endotoxin administration via the tracheal route has been extensively used to study the biological and pathophysiologic pathways of inflammation. In particular, experimental endotoxin instillation in the respiratory tree has allowed an extended research with regard to the local response of the lungs to the pathogenic stimulus. This study aims (a) to define early events in the inflammatory cascade and (b) to evaluate the efficacy of adrenaline to ameliorate the acute pulmonary inflammation in vivo after administration of intratracheal lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in an in vivo animal model. Two groups of animals were used for that purpose, a control group (single LPS administration) and a study group (subcutaneous adrenaline infusion following LPS administration). We found that mononuclear recruitment, along with an increased population of CD4(+) T lymphocytes, is an early event during the course of LPS-challenged inflammation. In the study group, we determined that adrenaline mediated the lung inflammation in a statistically significant degree. By the use of immunohistochemistry, we identified (1) an increased population of CD4(+) T lymphocytes in the inflammatory infiltrate, further endorsing the hypothesis that T-helper lymphocytes, along with macrophages, secrete cytokines which amplify the inflammatory response, and (2) an upregulation of ICAM-1 expression, suggesting an important role in the early pathogenesis of LPS-induced acute lung injury. Our study establishes that systemic adrenaline administration after LPS instillation may ameliorate the inflammatory lung response in vivo.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据