Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor has differing effects comparing intravascular versus extravascular models of sepsis.
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor has differing effects comparing intravascular versus extravascular models of sepsis.
复制标题
与血管内和血管外脓毒症模型相比，粒细胞集落刺激因子具有不同的作用。
DOI：
10.1097/01.ta.0000105884.75782.4d
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Eichacker,PeterQ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sevransky,JonathanE;Parent,Chantal;Cui,Xizhong;Karzai,Waheed;Fitz,Yvonne;Banks,StevenM;Gerstenberger,Eric;Danner,RobertL;Natanson,Charles;Eichacker,PeterQ
背景：以前，中性粒细胞刺激与粒细胞集落刺激因子（G-CSF）预处理增加了犬的生存率与腹腔内或支气管内大肠杆菌和大鼠的挑战与支气管内金黄色葡萄球菌。我们研究了G-CSF预处理是否对这些模型的血管内激发有益。大肠杆菌感染犬（n= 24）或静脉或支气管内S.金黄色葡萄球菌攻击的大鼠（n= 273）。结果：犬静脉注射E。大肠杆菌感染并没有降低死亡率（7/12 [58%] G-CSF vs. 5/12 [42%]对照），这与血管外感染期间的先前降低（10/35 [29%] G-CSF vs. 37/65 [57%]对照）形成对比。与目前和以前发表的犬研究一致，在大鼠中，G-CSF降低了支气管内S。金黄色（22/90 [24%] G-CSF vs. 26/51 [51%]对照组，p= 0.009），但静脉内感染未降低（67例中的34例[50%] G-CSF vs. 65例中的27例[42%]对照，p= 0.2），模式非常不同（G-CSF对血管内与支气管内S的影响p= 0.005）。结论：与血管外感染相比，血管内感染的脓毒症与血管内感染的脓毒症相比，血管内感染的脓毒症与血管外感染的脓毒症相比，血管内感染的脓毒症与血管内感染的脓毒症相比，血管内感染的脓毒症与血管外感染的脓毒症相比，血管内感染的大肠杆菌和沙门氏菌。大鼠中的金黄色葡萄球菌可能不能提供G-CSF刺激的嗜中性粒细胞可以发挥有益的抗菌作用的细菌区室化病灶。从临床上推断，像G-CSF这样的促炎剂可能对主要与间隔化血管外感染部位相关的败血症最有益。
Background:Previously, neutrophil stimulation with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) pretreatment increased survival rates in canines challenged with intraperitoneal or intrabronchial Escherichia coli and in rats challenged with intrabronchial Staphylococcus aureus. We investigated whether G-CSF pretreatment would be beneficial with intravascular challenge in these models.Methods:Animals were randomized to G-CSF or placebo pretreatment followed by intravenous E. coli challenge in canines (n= 24) or intravenous or intrabronchial S. aureus challenge in rats (n= 273). All animals were treated with antibiotics.Results:In canines, G-CSF before intravenous E. coli did not decrease mortality rates (7 of 12 [58%] G-CSF vs. 5 of 12 [42%] controls), which contrasted with prior reductions during extravascular infection (10 of 35 [29%] G-CSF vs. 37 of 65 [57%] controls). Consistent with the present and previously published studies in canines, in rats, G-CSF decreased mortality rates with intrabronchial S. aureus (22 of 90 [24%] G-CSF vs. 26 of 51 [51%] controls, p= 0.009) but did not decrease them with intravenous infection (34 of 67 [50%] G-CSF vs. 27 of 65 [42%] controls, p= 0.2) in patterns that were very different (p= 0.005 for the effects of G-CSF with intravascular vs. intrabronchial S. aureus).Conclusion:In contrast to extravascular infection, sepsis with intravascular E. coli in canines and S. aureus in rats may not provide a compartmentalized nidus of bacteria on which G-CSF–stimulated neutrophils can exert a beneficial antimicrobial effect. Extrapolated clinically, a proinflammatory agent like G-CSF may be most beneficial with sepsis related primarily to a compartmentalized extravascular site of infection.