3.9 Article

Effects and Safety of Xylitol on Middle Ear Epithelial Cells

期刊

出版社

AVES
DOI: 10.5152/iao.2014.004

关键词

Xylitol; human middle ear epithelial cells; otitis media; cytotoxicity

资金

  1. Bumsuk Academic Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: Xylitol is a natural sugar known to reduce dental decay. Recently, several epidemiology studies have also shown that xylitol can prevent acute otitis media in children. It is assumed that these effects are related to the inhibition of bacterial growth in the nasopharynx. However, the effects and safety of xylitol in middle ear epithelial cells, which play a key role in otitis media, have not been investigated. The present study was performed to investigate whether xylitol shows antiinflammatory or antioxidative effects on human middle ear epithelial cells and to assess its safety profile for clinical use. MATERIALS and METHODS: We induced inflammation in human middle ear epithelial cells (HMEEC) with lipopolysaccharide (LPS). After xylitol treatment, we measured expression levels of the inflammatory cytokines TNF-alpha and COX-2 and the mucin gene MUC5AC using semiquantitative real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and Western blot analysis. Cell viability and morphological changes following xylitol treatment were investigated by 3-(4.5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2.5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MMT) assay, flow cytometry, and Hoechst 33342 staining in human middle ear epithelial cells and mouse inner ear cells. RESULTS: Inflammatory cytokines and mucin gene expression were unaffected by xylitol. In addition, xylitol showed neither antioxidative effects nor cytotoxicity and did not stimulate apoptosis or necrosis of human middle ear epithelial cells or inner ear cells, even at high doses. CONCLUSION: Xylitol did not show antiinflammatory or antioxidative effects on HMMEC. It showed no toxicity in middle ear and inner ear cells. Xylitol may therefore be used safely to prevent acute otitis media.

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

3.9
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