4.6 Article

Role of Endothelial TLR4 for Neutrophil Recruitment into Central Nervous System Microvessels in Systemic Inflammation

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 183, 期 8, 页码 5244-5250

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.0901309

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brain inflammation is a frequent consequence of sepsis and septic shock., We imaged leukocyte recruitment in brain postcapillary venules induced by i.p. administration of LPS as a simple model of systemic inflammation. The i.p. injection of LPS (0.5 mg/kg) induced significant leukocyte rolling and adhesion in brain postcapillary venules of wild-type (WT) mice and more than 90% were neutrophils. However, no emigrated neutrophils were detected in brain parenchyma. High levels of TNF-alpha and IL-1 beta were detected in the plasma after LIPS injection but a different profile (IL-1 beta but not TNF-alpha) was detected in the brain. LPS caused no recruitment in TLR4 knockout mice. In chimeric mice with TLR4-expressing resident cells but TLR4-deficient bone marrow-derived circulating cells, neutrophil rolling and adhesion was similar to WT mice. This observation is consistent with a requirement for resident cells in the LPS-induced neutrophil recruitment into brain microvessels. Transgenic mice engineered to express TLR4 exclusively on endothelial cells had a similar level of leukocyte recruitment in brain as WT mice in response to LPS. High dose LPS (10 mg/kg) led to neutrophil infiltration in the brain parenchyma in WT mice. High KC and MIP-2 production was observed from brain parenchyma microglial cells, and CXCR2 knockout mice failed to recruit neutrophils. However, neither neutrophil infiltration nor KC or MIP-2 was observed in endothelial TLR4 transgenic mice in response to this LPS dose. Our results demonstrate that direct endothelial activation is sufficient to mediate leukocyte rolling and adhesion in cerebral microvessels but not sufficient for emigration to brain parenchyma. The Journal of Immunology, 2009, 183: 5244-5250.

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