4.8 Article

Mechanics of diseased red blood cells in human spleen and consequences for hereditary blood disorders

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1806501115

关键词

spleen; hereditary spherocytosis; hereditary elliptocytosis; vesiculation; cell fragmentation

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [U01HL114476, U01HL116323]
  2. Distinguished University Professorship at Nanyang Technological University
  3. Argonne Leadership Computing Facility [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  4. Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility [DE-AC05-00OR22725]
  5. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [U01HL116323, U01HL114476] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In red blood cell (RBC) diseases, the spleen contributes to anemia by clearing the damaged RBCs, but its unique ability to mechanically challenge RBCs also poses the risk of inducing other pathogenic effects. We have analyzed RBCs in hereditary spherocytosis (HS) and hereditary elliptocytosis (HE), two typical examples of blood disorders that result in membrane protein defects in RBCs. We use a two-component protein-scale RBC model to simulate the traversal of the interendothelial slit (IES) in the human spleen, a stringent biomechanical challenge on healthy and diseased RBCs that cannot be directly observed in vivo. In HS, our results confirm that the RBC loses surface due to weakened cohesion between the lipid bilayer and the cytoskeleton and reveal that surface loss may result from vesiculation of the RBC as it crosses IES. In HE, traversing IES induces sustained elongation of the RBC with impaired elasticity and fragmentation in severe disease. Our simulations thus suggest that in inherited RBC disorders, the spleen not only filters out pathological RBCs but also directly contributes to RBC alterations. These results provide a mechanistic rationale for different clinical outcomes documented following splenectomy in HS patients with spectrin-deficient and ankyrin-deficient RBCs and offer insights into the pathogenic role of human spleen in RBC diseases.

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

4.8
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