3.8 Article

Compensatory Thrombopoietin Production from the Liver and Bone Marrow Stimulates Thrombopoiesis of Living Rat Megakaryocytes in Chronic Renal Failure

期刊

NEPHRON EXTRA
卷 1, 期 1, 页码 147-156

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000333018

关键词

Chronic renal failure; Megakaryocytes; Plasma membrane invaginations; Thrombopoiesis; Thrombopoietin; Uremic bleeding

资金

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23790241] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aims: Decreased thrombopoiesis has been ascribed a role in the pathogenesis of uremic bleeding in chronic renal failure (CRF). However, serum thrombopoietin (TPO) levels are usually elevated in CRF patients, suggesting increased thrombopoiesis. The aim of this study was to determine the thrombopoietic activity in CRF. Methods: Male Sprague-Dawley rats that underwent 5/6 nephrectomy were used as the model of CRF. Age-matched sham-operated rats were used as controls. Single megakaryocytes were isolated from the rat bone marrow, and their size distribution was examined. Megakaryocyte membrane invaginations were monitored by confocal imaging of di-8-ANEPPS staining, and patch clamp whole-cell recordings of membrane capacitance. TPO gene expression was assessed in various tissues. Results: Circulating platelet counts and the number of large megakaryocytes were increased in the bone marrow of CRF rats. Massive di-8-ANEPPS staining and increased membrane capacitance in large megakaryocytes demonstrated increased membrane invaginations. Unaffected Kv1.3-channel currents per cell surface area demonstrated unaltered channel densities. TPO transcription was decreased in the renal cortex but increased in the liver and bone marrow of CRF rats. Conclusion: Increased thrombopoiesis in CRF was thought to be a reactive mechanism to platelet dysfunction. Increased TPO production from the liver and bone marrow compensated for decreased production from damaged kidneys. Copyright (C) 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel

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

3.8
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