4.1 Article

Nitrosative stress and cytokines are linked with the severity of sepsis and organ dysfunction

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL SCIENCE
卷 76, 期 1, 页码 29-34

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09674845.2018.1543160

关键词

iNOS; NO; nitrite; pro-inflammatory cytokines; sepsis; organ dysfunction

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, Science Engineering Research Board [YSS/2015/000846]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: An imbalance in oxidant-antioxidant status may impact the severity of sepsis. We hypothesised links between nitrosative stress and pro-inflammatory cytokines and their correlation with the severity of sepsis and associated organ dysfunction. Methods: The hypothesis was tested in 110 patients with sepsis (in whom a disease severity score (APACHE II) and assessment of organ failure score (SOFA) were determined) and 55 healthy volunteers. Neutrophil inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) expressions at mRNA and protein levels were estimated by real-time PCR and immuno-precipitation followed by Western blotting, respectively. Nitric oxide (NO) content was assessed in neutrophils by confocal microscopy, plasma nitrite by the Griess reaction and inflammatory cytokines (TNF-alpha, IFN-gamma and IL-8) by ELISA (in plasma) and real-time PCR (in neutrophils). Serum bilirubin and creatinine were determined by routine methods and lung function by the PaO2/FiO(2) ratio. Results: Increased neutrophil iNOS expression and NO content, plasma total nitrite content and pro-inflammatory cytokines were present in sepsis patients (all P < 0.001). Plasma nitrite correlated with cytokines, APACHE II, SOFA, PaO2/FiO(2) ratio, serum bilirubin and creatinine clearance (all r(2) 0.63-0.85, P < 0.001). Cytokines correlated with nitrite, APACHE II, SOFA, PaO2/FiO(2) ratio, serum bilirubin and creatinine clearance (all r(2) 0.35-0.85, P < 0.001). Conclusion: Neutrophils iNOS expression, NO content, plasma nitrite and cytokines have a role in the assessment of the severity of sepsis and organ toxicity.

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