4.6 Article

MICRO- AND MACROCIRCULATORY CHANGES DURING SEPSIS AND SEPTIC SHOCK IN A RAT MODEL

期刊

SHOCK
卷 49, 期 5, 页码 591-595

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SHK.0000000000000954

关键词

Buccal; interleukin 6 (IL-6); microvascular flow; organ function; renal

资金

  1. project of Leading Talents in Pearl River Talent Plan of Guangdong Province [81000-42020004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microcirculation is the motor of sepsis. In the present study, we investigated whether microcirculatory alterations occur before changes of systemic hemodynamics in a rat model of cecum ligation and puncture (CLP)-induced sepsis. We further investigated renal microcirculatory changes during sepsis and compared those with buccal microcirculation. Twelve male Sprague-Dawley rats were randomized into a sham control group (n = 6) and a CLP group (n = 6). Perfused microvessel density (PVD) and microvascular flow index (MFI) were evaluated using sidestream dark field (SDF) video microscopy at baseline-60, 120, 180, 240, 300, and 360 min following CLP. A semiquantitative score was calculated for vessels of less than 20 mu m, primarily representing the capillaries. Hemodynamic measurements such as cardiac output (CO), aortic pressure (AP), heart rate (HR), end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2), blood pH, and lactate were measured simultaneously. The serum cytokine interleukin 6 (IL-6) was measured at baseline-120, 240, and 360 min. In the CLP group, buccal PVD and MFI were reduced at 180 min (P< 0.05 vs. baseline); renal PVD and MFI were reduced at 180 min (P< 0.05 vs. baseline), but MAP and CO did not change until 300 min after CLP. In the rat model of peritonitis-induced sepsis, microcirculatory alterations of both peripheral mucosa and kidney occurred earlier than global hemodynamics. Monitoring the microcirculation may provide a means of early detection of circulatory failure during sepsis. The changes of renal microcirculation correlate with that of buccal during sepsis and 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

4.6
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