4.6 Article

Assessment of serum matrix metalloproteinases MMP-2 and MMP-9 after human liver transplantation: Increased serum MMP-9 level in acute rejection

期刊

TRANSPLANTATION
卷 77, 期 11, 页码 1646-1652

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.TP.0000131170.67671.75

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Alterations in synthesis and breakdown of extracellular matrix components play a role in acute rejection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) are capable of degrading basement membranes and are involved in the process of tissue remodelling in inflammation and liver fibrosis. Methods. We examined MMP-2 and MMP-9 in serum of 33 patients before and during 1 year after OLT, in 60 controls as well as in some specimens of cirrhotic liver and control liver tissue. Results. Serum MMP-2 levels before OLT were significantly higher compared with controls and decreased approximately 50% after OLT. Also, the MMP-2 content of cirrhotic liver specimens was significantly higher compared with normal liver. MMP-9 in serum and liver tissue of patients were similar to controls, but serum levels showed a peak at 1 week after OLT. At this time-point, total and active/inhibitor-complexed MMP-9 was significantly higher in patients with rejection (n = 13) compared with those without rejection (n = 20). The relative amount of MMP-9 in the active/inhibitor-complexed form did not differ between each group over time. Immunohistochemical staining at 1 week after OLT showed increased numbers of AMP-9-positive inflammatory cells in the portal triads of patients with rejection. Conclusions. Patients with acute allograft rejection have elevated serum levels of MMP-9 I week after OLT, which was most likely derived from inflammatory cells. An increased MMP-2 serum level and liver tissue content was found in patients with cirrhosis, which decreased after OLT. These observations indicate active involvement of MMP-2 and -9 in end-stage liver disease and OLT.

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