4.3 Article

Interplay between Nox2 Activity and Platelet Activation in Patients with Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Prospective Study

期刊

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2020/4165358

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Although preclinical studies highlighted the potential role of NADPH oxidase (NOX) in sepsis, only few studies evaluated the oxidative stress in patients with sepsis and septic shock. The objective of the study is to appraise the oxidative stress status and platelet function in patients with sepsis and septic shock compared to healthy controls. Methods and Results. Patients with sepsis or septic shock admitted to the hospital Policlinico Umberto I (Sapienza University, Rome) underwent a blood sample collection within 1 hour from admission. Platelet aggregation, serum thromboxane B2 (TxB2), soluble NOX2derived peptides (sNox2-dp), and hydrogen peroxide breakdown activity (HBA) were measured and compared to those of healthy volunteers. Overall, 33 patients were enrolled; of these, 20 (60.6%) had sepsis and 13 (39.4%) septic shock. Compared to healthy controls (n = 10, age 67:8 +/- 3:2, male 50%), patients with sepsis and septic shock had higher platelet aggregation (49% (IQR 45-55), 60% (55.75-67.25), and 73% (IQR 69-80), respectively, p < 0:001), higher serum TxB2 (77.5 (56.5-86.25), 122.5 (114-131.5), and 210 (195-230) pmol/L, respectively, p < 0:001), higher sNox2-dp (10 (7.75-12), 19.5 (17.25-21), and 33 (29.5-39) pg/mL, respectively, p < 0:001), and lower HBA (75% (67.25-81.5), 50% (45-54.75), and 27% (21.5-32.5), respectively, p < 0:001). Although not statistically significant, a trend in higher levels of serum TxB2 and sNox2-dp in patients who died was observed. Conclusions. Patients with septic shock exhibit higher Nox2 activity and platelet activation than patients with sepsis. These insights joined to better knowledge of these mechanisms could guide the identification of future prognostic biomarkers and new therapeutic strategies in the scenario of septic shock.

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

4.3
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