4.6 Article

Regulation of Alveolar Procoagulant Activity and Permeability in Direct Acute Lung Injury by Lung Epithelial Tissue Factor

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1165/rcmb.2014-0179OC

关键词

coagulation; fibrin; pulmonary; acute respiratory distress syndrome; alveolar capillary barrier permeability

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [NIH HL087738-07, NIH HL103836, NIH HL090785, NIH HL 105,479]
  2. Department of Veterans Affairs [BX001988]
  3. American Heart Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tissue factor (TF) initiates the extrinsic coagulation cascade in response to tissue injury, leading to local fibrin deposition. Low levels of TF in mice are associated with increased severity of acute lung injury (ALI) after intratracheal LPS administration. However, the cellular sources of the TF required for protection from LPS-induced ALI remain unknown. In the current study, transgenic mice with cell-specific deletions of TF in the lung epithelium or myeloid cells were treated with intratracheal LPS to determine the cellular sources of TF important in direct ALI. Cell-specific deletion of TF in the lung epithelium reduced total lung TF expression to 39% of wild-type (WT) levels at baseline and to 29% of WT levels after intratracheal LPS. In contrast, there was no reduction of TF with myeloid cell TF deletion. Mice lacking myeloid cell TF did not differ from WT mice in coagulation, inflammation, permeability, or hemorrhage. However, mice lacking lung epithelial TF had increased tissue injury, impaired activation of coagulation in the airspace, disrupted alveolar permeability, and increased alveolar hemorrhage after intratracheal LPS. Deletion of epithelial TF did not affect alveolar permeability in an indirect model of ALI caused by systemic LPS infusion. These studies demonstrate that the lung epithelium is the primary source of TF in the lung, contributing 60-70% of total lung TF, and that lung epithelial, but not myeloid, TF may be protective in direct ALI.

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