4.4 Article

Splenectomy attenuates intestinal ischemia-reperfusion - Induced acute lung injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 38, 期 10, 页码 1465-1470

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3468(03)00497-4

关键词

intestinal ischemia-reperfusion; lung injury; Kupffer cell blockage; splenectomy; gadolinium chloride; cytokines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Purpose: Intestinal ischemia-reperfusion (IIR) induced acute lung injury (ALI) has been documented. Kupffer cell blockage with gadolinium chloride (GdCl3) has been shown to attenuate IIR-induced ALI. However, the effects of splenic monocytes/macrophages on IIR-induced ALI has not been studied previously. In the current study, the authors aimed to investigate the role of splenectomy in IIR-incluced ALI. Methods: Forty-eight rats were divided randomly into 6 groups as follows: SHAM, SHAM+KCB, SHAM+SPLN, IIR, IIR+KCB, IIR+SPLN. Two hours of ischemia and 1 hour of reperfusion has been applied by clipping the SMA. GdCl3 was given 24 hours before experiment. Splenectomy was done just before SMA clipping. Lung levels of tumor necrosis-factor (TNF), interleukin (IL)-6, myeloperoxidase (MPO), and malondialdehyde (MDA) were assayed biochemically. Lung leukosequestration was determined by counting PMNLs histologically. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were done; P values less than .003 were considered significant. Results: Polimorphonuclear leukocyte (PMNL) counts and biochemical parameters in the IIR group were significantly higher than the other groups (P<.003). When compared with IIR group, PMNL counts and biochemical parameters were significantly decreased in the IIR+KCB and IIR+SPLN groups, respectively (P<.003). However, they were still significantly higher than their sham-operated controls (P<.003). Conclusions: This study documents that splenectomy attenuates ALI as well as Kupffer cell blockage. Spleen, an important component of mononuclear phagocytic system as liver Kupffer cells, might play an important role in the IIR-induced 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

4.4
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