4.1 Article

Tissue content of sulfomucins and sialomucins in the colonic mucosa, without fecal stream, undergoing daily intervention with sucralfate

期刊

ACTA CIRURGICA BRASILEIRA
卷 30, 期 5, 页码 328-338

出版社

ACTA CIRURGICA BRASILEIRA
DOI: 10.1590/S0102-865020150050000004

关键词

Colon; Colitis; Mucins; Sialomucins; Sucralfate; Image Processing; Computer-Assisted; Rats

类别

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2010/12492-7]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To measure the content of acidic mucin, sialomucin, and sulfomucins in the colonic mucosa without fecal stream submit to intervention with sucralfate (SCF). METHODS: Thirty-six rats were submitted to a right colostomy and a distal mucous fistula and divided into two groups according to sacrifice to be performed two or four weeks. Each group was divided into three subgroups according daily application of enemas containing saline, SCF at 1.0 g/kg/day or 2.0 g/kg/day. Colitis was diagnosed by histological analysis. Acid mucins were determined with the Alcian-Blue and sulfomucin and sialomucin by high iron diamine-alcian blue (HID-AB) techniques. The mucins were quantified by computer-assisted image analysis. Mann-Whitney and ANOVA tests were used to analyze the results establishing the level of significance of 5% for both (p<0.05). RESULTS: SCF enemas decreased the inflammation score and was related to the concentration used and time of the intervention. SCF at both concentrations increased the content of acid mucin, which was related to the concentration used and to the improvement in the inflammatory score. There was an increase in the content of sulfomucins and sialomucins in SCF groups. SCF increased sulfomucins from 2 weeks of intervention, which was not related to the dose or time of application. The increase in sialomucin content was related to the time and dose used in the intervention. CONCLUSION: Sucralfate increased the content of acidic mucins, primarily at the expense of sialomucin, which was affected by the dose and time of intervention.

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

4.1
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