4.1 Article

Plasma Soluble E-Selectin in Necrotising Enterocolitis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 419-422

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1038908

关键词

necrotising enterocolitis; adhesion molecules; E-selectin; inflammation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim: E-selectin is an important mediator of leukocyte-endothelial adhesion. It is expressed on activated endothelium, and shed into the circulation in its soluble form. In babies with necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), increased intestinal expression of E-selectin has been associated with multiple organ failure and an adverse outcome. The aim of this study was to determine whether increased circulating soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin) was associated with a worse prognosis. Methods: With ethical approval, plasma samples from 20 infants with Bell stage II and III NEC were analysed. Both pre- and postoperative samples were available in 6 infants. The severity of illness was assessed using a sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA) specifically designed for use in NEC. Plasma concentration of sE-selectin was determined by ELISA. Data, which were not normally distributed, were compared by Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Plasma sE-selectin was strongly negatively correlated with corrected gestational age at the time of sampling (r=-0.425, p=0.006). There was no association between plasma sE-selectin and outcome (death or survival to discharge), severity of intestinal disease (focal, multifocal or pan-intestinal), or SOFA score. Surgery for suspected perforation, however, caused a significant elevation in sE-selectin levels (p=0.031). Conclusions: Plasma sE-selectin, a described marker of endothelial activation, is increased following surgery for NEC. However, prematurity appears to be the cause of an increase in sE-selectin level, confounding the potential use of sE-selectin levels as a predictor of severity of illness in NEC.

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

4.1
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