4.7 Article

Early alterations of the innate and adaptive immune statuses in sepsis according to the type of underlying infection

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/cc9031

关键词

-

资金

  1. Vianex SA, Athens, Greece
  2. Wyeth Hellas SA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Although major changes of the immune system have been described in sepsis, it has never been studied whether these may differ in relation to the type of underlying infection or not. This was studied for the first time. Methods: The statuses of the innate and adaptive immune systems were prospectively compared in 505 patients. Whole blood was sampled within less than 24 hours of advent of sepsis; white blood cells were stained with monoclonal antibodies and analyzed though a flow cytometer. Results: Expression of HLA-DR was significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to acute pyelonephritis and intraabdominal infections compared with sepsis. The rate of apoptosis of natural killer (NK) cells differed significantly among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) compared with sepsis. The rate of apoptosis of NKT cells differed significantly among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to acute pyelonephritis, primary bacteremia and VAP/HAP compared with sepsis. Regarding adaptive immunity, absolute counts of CD4-lymphocytes were significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and intraabdominal infections compared with sepsis. Absolute counts of B-lymphocytes were significantly decreased among patients with severe sepsis/shock due to CAP compared with sepsis. Conclusions: Major differences of the early statuses of the innate and adaptive immune systems exist between sepsis and severe sepsis/shock in relation to the underlying type of infection. These results may have a major impact on therapeutics.

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