4.6 Article

SYNTHETIC OLIGOPEPTIDES RELATED TO THE β-SUBUNIT OF HUMAN CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN ATTENUATE INFLAMMATION AND LIVER DAMAGE AFTER (TRAUMA) HEMORRHAGIC SHOCK AND RESUSCITATION

期刊

SHOCK
卷 31, 期 3, 页码 285-291

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0b013e31817fd62a

关键词

Hemorrhagic shock; HCG-related oligopeptides; cytokines; adhesion molecules; organ damage

资金

  1. Biotempt B.V. (Koekange, The Netherlands).

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Severe hemorrhagic shock (HS) followed by resuscitation induces a massive inflammatory response, which may culminate into systemic inflammatory response syndrome, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and, finally, death. Treatments that effectively prevent this inflammation are limited so far. In a previous study, we demonstrated that synthetic oligopeptides related to the primary structure of human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) can inhibit the inflammatory response and mortality that follow high-dose LPS-induced inflammation. Considering this powerful anti-inflammatory effect, we investigated whether administration of similar synthetic HCG-related oligopeptides (LQG, AQGV, LAGV) during HS were able to attenuate the inflammatory response associated with this condition. Hemorrhagic shock was induced in rats for 60 min by blood withdrawal until a MAP of 40 mmHg was reached. Rats received a single injection with one of the hCG-related oligopeptides (LQGV, AQGV or LAGV) or 0.9% NaCl solution as control 30 min after induction of HS. Treatment with LQGV, AQGV, or LAGV prevented systemic release of TNF-alpha and IL-6 and was associated with reduced TNIF-alpha, IL-6, and E-selectin mRNA transcript levels in the liver. LQGV treatment prevented neutrophil infiltration into the liver and was associated with reduced liver damage. Our data suggest that HCG-related oligopeptides, in particular LQGV, have therapeutic potential by attenuating the life-threatening inflammation and organ damage that is associated with (trauma) HS and resuscitation.

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