4.4 Article

Current aspects of mucosal immunology and its influence by nutrition

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 183, 期 4, 页码 390-398

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9610(02)00821-8

关键词

gut-associated lymphoid tissue; mucosal immunity; enteral feeding; bombesin; glutamine

类别

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [5 R01 GM53439] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A significant body of clinical literature demonstrates that enteral feeding significantly reduces the incidence of pneumonia compared to patients fed parenterally. An immunologic link between the gastrointestinal tract and respiratory tract is postulated via the common mucosal immune hypothesis. This hypothesis states that cells are sensitized within the Peyer's patches of the small intestine and are subsequently distributed to submucosal locations in both intestinal and extra intestinal sites. This system is exquisitely sensitive to route and type of nutrition. Data Source: This review examines the laboratory data regarding cell numbers, cell phenotypes, cytokine profile, and immunologic function in both intestinal and extra intestinal sites in animals that have been administered either parenteral feeding or various types of enteral feeding. It also establishes links between a specific nutrient, glutamine, the enteric nervous system, byway of neuropeptides, and mucosal immunity. Conclusion: Progress in understanding relationships between nutrient availability, enteric nervous system stimulation, and nutrient delivery on mucosal immunity offers opportunities to explore immune systems previously not appreciated by clinicians and basic scientists. These opportunities offer new challenges to the physician scientist, basic scientist, and clinician to understand, manipulate, and apply these concepts to the critically ill patient population by favorably influencing immunologic barriers and the inflammatory response. (C) 2002 Excerpta Medica, Inc. All rights reserved.

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