4.3 Article

Neutrophil extracellular traps contribute to the pathogenesis of acid-aspiration-induced ALI/ARDS

期刊

ONCOTARGET
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 1772-1784

出版社

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.22744

关键词

neutrophil extracellular traps(NETs); acid-aspiration; acute lung injury(ALI); acute respiratory distress syndrome(ARDS)

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81470266, 81770080]
  2. Independent Explore Innovative Projects of Central South University [2017zzts208]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ALI/ARDS) is a manifestation of systemic inflammation in the lungs, but the factors that trigger inflammation in ALI/ARDS are unclear. We hypothesized that neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) contribute to the pathogenesis of acid aspiration-induced ALI/ARDS. Results: Analysis of bronchial aspirates from ARDS patients showed that NETs were significantly correlated with the degree of ARDS (r = -0.5846, p = 0.0359). NETs in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of acid-aspiration mice were significantly higher (141.6 +/- 23.08) at 3 h after injury than those in the sham group (1234 +/- 101.9; p = 0.003, n = 5 per group). Exogenous NETs aggravated lung injury, while alvelestat and DNase markedly attenuated the intensity of ARDS. Materials and Methods: We investigated whether NETs are involved in the severity of gastric aspiration-induced ARDS. Then, a hydrochloric acid aspiration-induced ALI murine model was used to assess whether NETs are pathogenic and whether targeting NETs is protective. Exogenous NETs were administered to mice. Alvelestat can inhibit neutrophil elastase (NE), which serves an important role in NET formation, so we investigated whether alvelestat could protect against ALI in cell and mouse models. Conclusions: NETs may contribute to ALI/ARDS by promoting tissue damage and systemic inflammation. Targeting NETs by alvelestat may be a potential therapeutic strategy.

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