Immunomodulation Mediated by Azithromycin in Experimental Periapical Inflammation.
Immunomodulation Mediated by Azithromycin in Experimental Periapical Inflammation.
复制标题
阿奇霉素在实验性周期炎症中介导的免疫调节。
DOI：
10.1016/j.joen.2020.07.028
复制
发表时间：
2020-11
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Sasaki H
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Andrada AC;Azuma MM;Furusho H;Hirai K;Xu S;White RR;Sasaki H
本研究的目的是比较阿奇霉素（AZM），氨苄青霉素（AMP），阿莫西林（AMX）和克林霉素（CLI）的免疫调节作用“在体外”和AZM对预先存在的根尖周病变相比，氨苄青霉素（AMP）。采用琼脂纸片扩散法检测了4种常见的牙髓致病菌（微小单胞菌、中间链球菌、中间普雷沃菌和具核梭杆菌）对AZM、AMP、AMX和CLI的敏感性。用AZM、AMP或PBS（磷酸盐缓冲盐水）处理C57 BL/6 J小鼠中预先存在的根尖周病变。根尖周骨愈合和炎症细胞浸润的模式进行了评估后，10天的治疗，分别通过微型计算机断层扫描和组织学。采用荧光素酶法和酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）检测抗生素对病原体刺激的NF-κB活化及IL-1α和TNF-α产生的影响。所有检查的根管病原体均对AZM、AMP、AMX和CLI敏感。与PBS相比，AZM显著减弱根尖周骨丢失。PBS导致广泛扩散的混合炎性细胞浸润。相比之下，AXM会导致中性粒细胞和M2巨噬细胞的局部浸润以及晚期纤维化。虽然AMP对骨的影响尚不确定，但炎性细胞浸润比PBS轻得多。然而，观察到的大多数巨噬细胞似乎是M1巨噬细胞。AZM抑制病原体刺激的NF-κB活化和细胞因子产生，而AMP、AMX和CLI仅适度减少细胞因子产生。这项研究表明，AZM导致预先存在的实验性根尖周炎的决议。我们的数据提供了一个视角，在根管治疗抗生素选择的宿主反应。然而，设计良好的临床试验是必要的，以更好地阐明AZM作为抗生素治疗推荐的牙髓治疗的连续治疗的好处。虽然AZM和AMP对既存根尖周病变均有效，但AZM可能依赖于其免疫调节作用而导致高级伤口愈合。
The purpose of the present study was to compare the immunomodulatory effect of azithromycin (AZM), ampicillin (AMP), amoxicillin (AMX) and clindamycin (CLI) “in vitro” and AZM on pre-existing periapical lesions when compared to ampicillin (AMP). Susceptibility of four common human endodontic pathogens (Parvimonas micra, Streptococcus intermedius, Prevotella intermedia, and Fusobacterium nucleatum) to AZM, AMP, AMX, and CLI was confirmed by agar disc diffusion assay. Pre-existing periapical lesions in C57BL/6J mice were treated with AZM, AMP, or PBS (phosphate buffered saline). Periapical bone healing and pattern of inflammatory cell infiltration were evaluated after a 10-day treatment by micro computed tomography and histology, respectively. Besides, the effect of antibiotics in pathogen-stimulated NF-κB activation and production of IL-1α and TNF-α was assessed in vitro by luciferase assay and ELISA. All examined endodontic pathogens were susceptible to AZM, AMP, AMX, and CLI. AZM significantly attenuated periapical bone loss vs. PBS. PBS resulted in widely diffused infiltration of mixed inflammatory cells. By contrast, AZM brought about localized infiltration of neutrophils and M2 macrophages and advanced fibrosis. Although the effect of AMP on bone was uncertain, inflammatory cell infiltration was considerably milder than PBS. However, most macrophages observed seemed to be M1 macrophages. AZM suppressed pathogen-stimulated NF-κB activation and cytokine production, whereas AMP, AMX, and CLI reduced only cytokine production moderately. This study showed that AZM led to the resolution of pre-existing experimental periapical inflammation. Our data provide a perspective on host response in antibiotic selection for endodontic treatment. However, well-designed clinical trials are necessary to better elucidate the benefits of AZM as an adjunctive therapy for endodontic treatment when antibiotic therapy is recommended. Although both AZM and AMP were effective on pre-existing periapical lesions, AZM led to advanced wound healing probably depending on its immunomodulatory effect.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Cross, SE;Thompson, MJ;Roberts, MS
通讯作者：
Roberts, MS
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
GLADUE, RP;BRIGHT, GM;NEWBORG, MF
通讯作者：
NEWBORG, MF
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Escalante, Mariana Gil;Eubank, Tim D.;Walters, John D.
通讯作者：
Walters, John D.
影响因子：
5.2
作者：
FOULDS, G;SHEPARD, RM;JOHNSON, RB
通讯作者：
JOHNSON, RB
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
WANG, CY;STASHENKO, P
通讯作者：
STASHENKO, P