4.7 Article

Rehydration of high-density sickle erythrocytes in vitro

期刊

BLOOD
卷 100, 期 8, 页码 3017-3025

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2002-02-0631

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [R01 HL57614, R01 HL51174, P60 HL58421] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have identified older, low-density sickle red blood cells (SSRBCs) that were resistant to dehydration by valinomycin, a K+ ionophore. These cells, thought to derive from dense SSRBCs that have rehydrated, may represent a terminal cellular phase. To study rehydration, we subjected dense SSRBCs (rho>1.107 g/cc) to either oxygenated incubation or rapid oxygenated/deoxygenated (oxy/deoxy) cycling (70 seconds per cycle). Light cells (rho<1.087 g/cc) were generated during both oxy incubation (2.9%+/- 2.1%; n=42) and oxy/deoxy cycling (5.3%+/- 2.4%; n=42). The rehydrated cells were K+-depleted (K+=20 +/- 14 mmol/kg hemoglobin [Hb]) and Na+-loaded (Na+=394 +/- 106 mmol/kg Hb), and had high levels of external phosphatidylserine. In the presence of external calcium, the generation of rehydrated SSRBCs was inhibited during oxy/deoxy cycling, but the percentage with external phosphatidylserine increased. The calcium-mediated inhibition of rehydration was reversed by charybdotoxin, implying that rehydration was delayed in some cells by the Ca++-activated K+ channel. Preincubation of dense SSRBCs with DIDS (4,4'-di-isothiocyanato-2,2'-disulfostilbene) inhibited the generation of light cells during fast oxy/deoxy cycling, but not during oxy incubation. These resuits suggest that the sickling-induced pathway, previously implicated in SSRBC dehydration, may be involved in the deoxy-dependent component of rehydration for dense, K+-depleted cells. Light-cell generation was inhibited by 1 mM bumetanide during both oxy incubation and oxy/deoxy cycling, providing evidence that a bumetanide-sensitive, deoxy-independent pathway, previously described in circulating light SSRBCs, also contributes to the rehydration of high-density SSRBCs.

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

4.7
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