4.6 Article

Renal bioenergetics during early gram-negative mammalian sepsis and angiotensin II infusion

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 38, 期 5, 页码 886-893

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-012-2487-2

关键词

Acute kidney injury; Angiotensin II; Magnetic resonance spectroscopy; Renal blood flow; Septic shock

资金

  1. NHMRC, Australia [454615]
  2. Victorian Government
  3. Iwate Medical University
  4. NHMRC [566819]
  5. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [566819] Funding Source: NHMRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To measure renal adenosine triphosphate (ATP) (bioenergetics) during hypotensive sepsis with or without angiotensin II (Ang II) infusion. In anaesthetised sheep implanted with a renal artery flow probe and a magnetic resonance coil around one kidney, we induced hypotensive sepsis with intravenous Escherichia coli injection. We measured mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate, renal blood flow RBF and renal ATP levels using magnetic resonance spectroscopy. After 2 h of sepsis, we randomly assigned sheep to receive an infusion of Ang II or vehicle intravenously and studied the effect of treatment on the same variables. After E. coli administration, the experimental animals developed hypotensive sepsis (MAP from 92 +/- A 9 at baseline to 58 +/- A 4 mmHg at 4 h). Initially, RBF increased, then, after 4 h, it decreased below control levels (from 175 +/- A 28 at baseline to 138 +/- A 27 mL/min). Despite decreased RBF and hypotension, renal ATP was unchanged (total ATP to inorganic phosphate ratio from 0.69 +/- A 0.02 to 0.70 +/- A 0.02). Ang II infusion restored MAP but caused significant renal vasoconstriction. However, it induced no changes in renal ATP (total ATP to inorganic phosphate ratio from 0.79 +/- A 0.03 to 0.80 +/- A 0.02). During early hypotensive experimental Gram-negative sepsis, there was no evidence of renal bioenergetic failure despite decreased RBF. In this setting, the addition of a powerful renal vasoconstrictor does not lead to deterioration in renal bioenergetics.

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

4.6
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