4.7 Article

Ileocolonic Healing after Small Ileocecal Resection in Mice: NOD2 Deficiency Impairs Anastomotic Healing by Local Mechanisms

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103601

关键词

NOD2; ileocecal healing; anastomosis; muramy-dipeptide; matrix; matrix metalloproteinase; microbiome; Crohn's disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the role of NOD2 gene after limited ileocecal resection (ICR). The results showed that Nod2 knockout mice had impaired healing after the surgery, and treatment with NOD2 agonist did not improve the situation. Additionally, Nod2 knockout mice had a lower rate of anastomotic leak.
Ileocecal resection (ICR) is frequently performed in Crohn's disease (CD). NOD2 mutations are risk factors for CD. Nod2 knockout (ko) mice show impaired anastomotic healing after extended ICR. We further investigated the role of NOD2 after limited ICR. C57B16/J (wt) and Nod2 ko littermates underwent limited ICR including 1-2 cm terminal ileum and were randomly assigned to vehicle or MDP treatment. Bursting pressure was measured on POD 5, and the anastomosis was analyzed for matrix turn-over and granulation tissue. Wound fibroblasts from subcutaneously implanted sponges were used for comparison. The M1/M2 macrophage plasma cytokines were analyzed. Mortality was not different between groups. Bursting pressure was significantly decreased in ko mice. This was associated with less granulation tissue but was not affected by MDP. However, anastomotic leak (AL) rate tended to be lower in MDP-treated ko mice (29% vs. 11%, p = 0.07). mRNA expression of collagen-1a (col1 a), collagen-3a (col3 a), matrix metalloproteinase (mmp)2 and mmp9 was increased in ko mice, indicating increased matrix turn-over, specifically in the anastomosis. Systemic TNF-a expression was significantly lower in ko mice. Ileocolonic healing is impaired in Nod2 ko mice after limited ICR by local mechanisms maybe including local dysbiosis.

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

4.7
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