鄭一瑋 賀能英 陳珍 嚴(yán)啟滔 莫澤珣 郭振輝,
1廣州醫(yī)科大學(xué)(廣州 510182);2廣州軍區(qū)廣州總醫(yī)院老年重癥醫(yī)學(xué)科(廣州 510010);3廣東省老年感染與器官功能支持重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室(廣州 510010)
膿毒癥是由感染引起的宿主免疫反應(yīng)失調(diào)所導(dǎo)致的致命性器官功能障礙[1],不僅是發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家非冠心病重癥監(jiān)護(hù)病房中死亡的主要原因,也是最常見的死亡原因[2]。嚴(yán)重膿毒病的全球年發(fā)病率估計(jì)為每10萬人年300例,占ICU入院的10%[3-4]。由于人口老齡化和新出現(xiàn)的抗生素耐藥性,膿毒癥在臨床上常常與一種或多種基礎(chǔ)疾病合并出現(xiàn)。根據(jù)國(guó)際糖尿病聯(lián)盟發(fā)布的第七版《糖尿病概覽》[5],2015年全球糖尿病患病人數(shù)73億,預(yù)計(jì)到2040年,全球糖尿病人數(shù)將增長(zhǎng)為90億,糖尿病已成為人口基數(shù)最為龐大的基礎(chǔ)疾病之一。在膿毒癥相關(guān)的科研領(lǐng)域,有多種動(dòng)物模型,其中以盲腸結(jié)扎穿孔術(shù)(cecal ligation and puncture,CLP)最為經(jīng)典[6]。然而,單一疾病的動(dòng)物模型與臨床實(shí)際情況不符。因此,我們需要更貼合臨床實(shí)際情況的復(fù)合動(dòng)物模型。
間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞(mesenchymal stem cells,MSC)也被稱為多能間充質(zhì)基質(zhì)細(xì)胞,是可分化為間質(zhì)譜系的多能細(xì)胞,并可分泌具有促進(jìn)受損組織再生的旁分泌作用的細(xì)胞因子和生長(zhǎng)因子[7]。由于間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞具有抗炎-促炎平衡調(diào)節(jié)作用,其對(duì)膿毒癥的治療作用已成為新的研究熱點(diǎn)[7-8]。2016年1月至2017年6月,本研究擬建立SD大鼠2型糖尿病(type 2 diabetic rat model,T2DM)膿毒癥復(fù)合動(dòng)物模型,探討間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞對(duì)糖尿病膿毒癥大鼠肺組織的影響。
表1 大鼠空腹血糖及體質(zhì)量變化Tab.1 Fasting blood glucose and body mass changes of rat ±s
表1 大鼠空腹血糖及體質(zhì)量變化Tab.1 Fasting blood glucose and body mass changes of rat ±s
注:HDFB為“注射鏈脲佐菌素前”,HDFA為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后”,STZ3D為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后第3天”,STZ7D為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后第7天”,STZ14D為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后第14天”,STZ21D為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后第21天”,STZ28D為“注射鏈脲佐菌素后第28天”
空腹血糖(mmol/L)體質(zhì)量(g)組別HDFB HDFA STZ3D STZ7D STZ14D STZ21D STZ28D正常大鼠4.68±0.64 6.69±1.01 10.88±3.18 13.30±3.09 13.34±3.67 9.30±1.36 8.19±0.98 T2DM大鼠4.63±0.79 6.84±1.37 19.67±4.87 21.70±4.20 22.01±4.96 19.89±4.19 21.43±3.33 t值0.292 0.259 10.447 11.125 9.484 16.479 26.093 P值0.112 0.131 0.078 0.005 0.003 0.000 0.000正常大鼠190.88±9.17 442.40±33.57 462.94±47.15 435.48±43.69 461.73±48.12 494.38±37.72 528.15±47.42 T2DM大鼠189.29±29.10 413.90±68.91 392.55±65.51 377.03±65.28 366.61±36.28 356.38±64.03 342.45±61.71 t值0.361 2.581 6.063 5.171 8.074 12.899 16.505 P值0.204 0.412 0.293 0.525 0.479 0.172 0.098
1.1 動(dòng)物模型制備與分組
1.1.1 糖尿病-膿毒癥大鼠模型構(gòu)建 SPF級(jí)健康雄性SD大鼠共96只購(gòu)自廣東省動(dòng)物中心,體質(zhì)量170~220 g,5~6周齡。高脂高糖喂養(yǎng)4周后,按40 mg/kg腹腔注射鏈脲佐菌素(美國(guó)Sigma公司),72 h后測(cè)空腹血糖≥16.7 mmol/L,SD大鼠T2DM模型成功。采用CLP術(shù)構(gòu)建糖尿病-膿毒癥大鼠模型。
1.1.2 動(dòng)物分組 隨機(jī)分為8組:非糖尿病大鼠對(duì)照組(NDM?Control組),非糖尿病大鼠假手術(shù)組(NDM?Sham組),非糖尿病大鼠CLP組(NDM?CLP+Saline組),非糖尿病大鼠CLP后骨髓間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞(bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells,BMSC)(廣州賽業(yè)公司)治療組(NDM?CLP+BMSCs組);糖尿病大鼠對(duì)照組(T2DM?Control組),糖尿病大鼠假手術(shù)組(T2DM?Sham組),糖尿病大鼠CLP組(T2DM?CLP+Saline組),糖尿病大鼠CLP后BMSC治療組(T2DM?CLP+BMSCs組)。每組4個(gè)時(shí)間點(diǎn):術(shù)后6、12、18、24 h。
1.2 標(biāo)本的采集與處理 水合氯醛(3 mg/kg)腹腔注射麻醉大鼠,取血后處死大鼠,取肺組織100 mg,制成勻漿,用于ELISA檢測(cè)。另取肺組織置于4%多聚甲醛中固定,常規(guī)制成厚為5 μm的石蠟切片,用于HE染色。
1.3 酶聯(lián)免疫ELISA法 肺泡表面活性物質(zhì)相關(guān)蛋白?D(surfactant protein?d ,SP?D)ELISA試劑盒、腫瘤壞死因子?α(tumor necrosis factor?α,TNF?α)ELISA 試劑盒、干擾素?γ(interferon?γ,IFN?γ)ELI?SA試劑盒、白細(xì)胞介素?10(interleukin?10,IL?10)ELISA試劑盒均購(gòu)自武漢華美公司。按試劑盒說明書步驟進(jìn)行檢測(cè)。
1.4 HE染色 5 μm石蠟切片浸入二甲苯脫蠟,蘇木素染色,1%鹽酸乙醇分化,0.2%氨水返藍(lán),伊紅染色,梯度酒精脫水,二甲苯透明,中性樹膠固封,制成HE染色片。
1.5 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法 計(jì)數(shù)資料用絕對(duì)數(shù)表示,計(jì)量資料用均數(shù)±標(biāo)準(zhǔn)差表示,兩組及多組間樣本均數(shù)的比較采用t檢驗(yàn)和單因素方差分析,不同時(shí)間點(diǎn)細(xì)胞因子水平比較采用重復(fù)測(cè)量的方差分析。采用SPSS 21.0統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件(IBM,Armonk,NY,USA),P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.1 大鼠空腹血糖和體質(zhì)量比較 SD大鼠高糖高脂喂養(yǎng)4周,大鼠體質(zhì)量升高;注射STZ后,大鼠飲水量、尿量明顯增加,空腹血糖升高,體質(zhì)量下降,出現(xiàn)典型的糖尿病“三多一少”癥狀。CLP術(shù)后,大鼠體溫上升,寒戰(zhàn),立毛,全身虛弱,精神萎靡,蜷縮成團(tuán),反應(yīng)遲鈍(表1及圖1)。
2.2 大鼠腹腔臟器外觀 CLP術(shù)后24 h解剖非糖尿病大鼠,打開腹腔時(shí)見盲腸結(jié)扎穿孔處腫脹紫黑,腹腔滲液較少,局部腸管擴(kuò)張不明顯;CLP術(shù)后24 h解剖糖尿病大鼠,打開腹腔時(shí)有惡臭氣味,盲腸結(jié)扎穿孔處腫脹發(fā)白,臟器組織質(zhì)地松脆,腹腔內(nèi)積液較多,腸管附著膿苔,小腸充血水腫,腸管明顯擴(kuò)張(圖2)。
2.3 肺組織病理學(xué)檢查 顯微鏡下見各時(shí)間點(diǎn)的對(duì)照組及假手術(shù)組大鼠肺組織結(jié)構(gòu)清晰,肺泡壁菲薄,血管無擴(kuò)張無充血。但CLP組及MSC治療組大鼠的肺組織隨著時(shí)間推移,血管逐漸擴(kuò)張、充血,肺泡結(jié)構(gòu)漸漸破壞,肺泡間隔愈發(fā)增厚,肺泡腔和肺間質(zhì)內(nèi)紅細(xì)胞不斷增多(圖3~6)。
圖1 鏈脲佐菌素注射后大鼠空腹血糖及體質(zhì)量水平變化曲線Fig.1 Changes of fasting blood glucose and body mass after streptozotocin injection in rats
圖2 大鼠盲腸結(jié)扎穿孔(CLP)術(shù)后24 h的解剖觀察Fig.2 Anatomical observation 24 hours after cecal ligation and puncture(CLP)in rats
圖4 假手術(shù)組大鼠肺組織石蠟切片HE染色(×40)Fig.4 HE staining of paraffin section of rat lung tissue in sham operation group(× 40)
圖5 CLP組大鼠肺組織石蠟切片HE染色(×40)Fig.5 HE staining of paraffin section in the lung tissue of group CLP rats(× 40)
圖6 CLP術(shù)后MSC治療組大鼠肺組織HE染色(×40)Fig.6 HE staining of lung tissue of rats in MSC treatment group after CLP(× 40)
表2 大鼠肺組織SP?D水平比較Tab.2 SP?D levels in rat lung tissue ±s,ng/mL
表2 大鼠肺組織SP?D水平比較Tab.2 SP?D levels in rat lung tissue ±s,ng/mL
注:*△同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Control;◇同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Sham;☆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?CLP+Saline;▲同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Control;◆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Sham;★同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?CLP+Saline比較P<0.05
NDM?CONTROL NDM?Sham NDM?CLP+Saline NDM?CLP+BMSCs T2DM?CONTROL T2DM?Sham T2DM?CLP+Saline T2DM?CLP+BMSCs F值P值6 h 2.41±0.58 3.6±1.14 7.55 ± 0.46△◇7.14 ± 1.13△◇2.25±0.31 4.36±0.53 7.35 ± 0.21▲◆6.92 ± 1.02▲◆2.532 0.059 12 h 3.87±1.77 4.54±1.05 13.72 ± 2.15△◇7.59± 0.88△☆4.02±1.98 4.41±0.50 13.23 ± 3.74▲◆7.10 ± 0.86▲◆3.607 0.016 18 h 3.15±1.54 5.65±0.93 33.58 ± 15.50△◇33.81 ± 11.69△◇4.43±1.38 8.77±1.41 17.71±5.53▲10.73±1.27▲6.269 0.001 24 h 3.58±1.65 4.41±1.31 58.40 ± 26.87△◇44.40 ± 1.75△◇3.78±0.76 9.97±1.81 34.57 ± 12.72▲◆7.46 ± 2.14◆★8.468 0.000 F值531.554 170.463 30.576 290.439 137.689 1 142.873 39.230 3 307.094 P值0.002 0.006 0.031 0.003 0.007 0.001 0.025 0.000
2.4 酶聯(lián)免疫法檢測(cè)SP?D、TNF?α、IFN?γ、IL?10表達(dá)水平 假手術(shù)及CLP術(shù)后,非糖尿病大鼠CLP組和MSC治療組SP?D水平升高,24 h達(dá)高峰,CLP組和MSC治療組各時(shí)間點(diǎn)SP?D水平比較無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05);糖尿病大鼠組MSC治療組SP?D水平無升高,24 h時(shí)間點(diǎn)SP?D水平與CLP組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05,表2及圖7)。
假手術(shù)及CLP術(shù)后,非糖尿病大鼠組CLP組和MSC治療組的TNF?α水平明顯升高,CLP組和MSC治療組各時(shí)間點(diǎn)TNF?α水平比較無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05);糖尿病大鼠組的MSC治療組TNF?α水平無升高,18 h和24 h時(shí)間點(diǎn)TNF?α水平與CLP組比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05,表3及圖8)。
假手術(shù)及CLP術(shù)后,非糖尿病大鼠組的CLP組IFN?γ水平明顯升高,24 h達(dá)高峰,18 h和24 h時(shí)間點(diǎn)CLP組和MSC治療組IFN?γ水平比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05);糖尿病大鼠組的CLP組和MSCs治療組各時(shí)間點(diǎn)IFN?γ水平比較無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05,表4及圖9)。
圖7 非糖尿病組與糖尿病組大鼠肺組織SP?D水平變化曲線Fig.7 SP?D levels in lungs of non?diabetic and diabetic rats
表3 大鼠肺組織TNF?α水平比較Tab.3 Comparison of TNF?α levels in rat lung tissue ±s,pg/mL
表3 大鼠肺組織TNF?α水平比較Tab.3 Comparison of TNF?α levels in rat lung tissue ±s,pg/mL
注:*△同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Control;◇同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Sham;☆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?CLP+Saline;▲同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Control;◆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Sham;★同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?CLP+Saline比較P<0.05
NDM?CONTROL NDM?Sham NDM?CLP+Saline NDM?CLP+BMSCs T2DM?CONTROL T2DM?Sham T2DM?CLP+Saline T2DM?CLP+BMSCs F值P值6 h 113.18±19.19 129.78±18.36 138.58± 7.20△148.00± 12.73△105.21±7.50 97.01±4.73 122.79± 10.18◆124.48± 20.59◆1.037 0.444 12 h 93.79±6.30 143.33±4.01△227.24±30.01△324.54±21.66△107.16±14.44 114.54±7.30 213.32 ± 9.50▲◆234.37 ± 43.98▲◆4.881 0.004 18 h 111.25±11.57 146.37±21.50 326.52 ± 103.55△◇569.62 ± 97.00△◇114.84±25.40 192.67±18.97 410.04± 112.36▲159.07± 13.14◆★5.181 0.003 24 h 108.06±14.96 148.99±14.51 635.29 ± 28.30△◇658.53 ± 41.02△◇118.32±20.62 282.59 ± 31.48▲◆616.75 ± 60.79▲◆138.52 ± 5.46◆★2.795 0.042 F值474.086 1 806.986 969.773 4 945.609 375.413 3 969.655 175.644 308.911 P值0.002 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.006 0.003
表4 大鼠肺組織IFN?γ水平比較Tab.4 Rat lung tissue IFN?γ levels ±s,pg/mL
表4 大鼠肺組織IFN?γ水平比較Tab.4 Rat lung tissue IFN?γ levels ±s,pg/mL
注:*△同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Control;◇同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Sham;☆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?CLP+Saline;▲同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Control;◆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Sham;★同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?CLP+Saline比較P<0.05
NDM?CONTROL NDM?Sham NDM?CLP+Saline NDM?CLP+BMSCs T2DM?CONTROL T2DM?Sham T2DM?CLP+Saline T2DM?CLP+BMSCs F值P值6 h 0.40±0.03 0.66±0.19 2.06 ± 0.26△◇1.57 ± 0.50△◇0.36±0.04 0.45±0.43 1.69 ± 0.45▲◆1.71 ± 0.27▲◆4.440 0.006 12 h 0.87±0.57 1.40±0.28 2.94 ± 0.11△◇3.01 ± 0.56△◇0.84±0.60 0.75±0.12 2.07 ± 0.08▲◆2.00 ± 0.78▲◆2.092 0.105 18 h 0.62±0.14 1.55±0.12 5.67 ± 2.19△◇2.70 ± 0.94△☆0.52±0.41 1.46±0.30 4.30 ± 1.17▲◆2.72±0.65▲2.547 0.058 24 h 0.90±0.47 1.70±0.23 10.98± 1.60△◇2.91± 2.80◇☆1.24±0.33 1.39±0.52 5.55± 1.10▲◆3.73± 0.45▲◆6.440 0.001 F值715.350 543.546 164.799 309.323 19.277 437.627 4677.537 126.473 P值0.001 0.002 0.006 0.003 0.048 0.002 0.000 0.008
假手術(shù)及CLP術(shù)后,非糖尿病大鼠組的CLP組和MSC治療組IL?10水平波動(dòng)明顯,CLP組和MSC治療組在24 h的IL?10水平比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05);糖尿病大鼠組的MSC治療組在時(shí)間點(diǎn)12 h的IL?10水平升高,而后下降,CLP組和MSC治療組在12 h的IL?10水平比較有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P<0.05),18 h和24 h無統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P>0.05,表5及圖10)。
圖8 非糖尿病與糖尿病組大鼠肺組織TNF?α水平變化曲線Fig.8 TNF?α levels in lung tissue of non?diabetic and diabetic rats
圖9 非糖尿病與糖尿病大鼠肺組織INF?γ水平變化曲線Fig.9 INF?γ levels in lung tissue of non?diabetic and diabetic rats
表5 大鼠肺組織IL?10水平比較Tab.5 Comparison of IL?10 levels in rat lung tissue ±s,pg/mL
表5 大鼠肺組織IL?10水平比較Tab.5 Comparison of IL?10 levels in rat lung tissue ±s,pg/mL
注:*△同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Control;◇同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?Sham;☆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.NDM?CLP+Saline;▲同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Control;◆同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?Sham;★同一時(shí)間點(diǎn)vs.T2DM?CLP+Saline比較P<0.05
NDM?CONTROL NDM?Sham NDM?CLP+Saline NDM?CLP+BMSCs T2DM?CONTROL T2DM?Sham T2DM?CLP+Saline T2DM?CLP+BMSCs F值P值6 h 5.24±0.37 6.20±1.20 27.98 ± 6.82△◇31.15 ± 7.46△◇5.06±1.41 4.56±1.44 27.00 ± 7.11▲◆26.55 ± 9.30▲◆2.807 0.041 12 h 4.52±1.73 7.26±1.54 17.84 ± 7.87△◇16.61 ± 1.44△◇6.97±1.51 7.44±0.68 17.14 ± 4.20▲◆37.22 ± 9.57▲◆★6.509 0.001 18 h 5.60±0.80 9.46±2.03 30.80 ± 9.14△◇29.99 ± 2.08△◇5.72±0.89 16.52±1.48 18.44±6.16▲26.97±15.44▲2.742 0.045 24 h 6.60±1.59 11.01±2.20 5.27±0.33△25.63± 8.30◇☆5.92±2.43 21.42±1.68▲11.27±2.71◆9.06±2.07◆2.179 0.093 F值127.664 402.693 38.180 206.163 100.600 868.210 427.205 43.086 P值0.008 0.002 0.025 0.005 0.010 0.001 0.002 0.022
圖10 非糖尿病與糖尿病大鼠肺組織IL?10水平變化曲線Fig.10 IL?10 levels in lung tissue of non?diabetic and diabetic rats
目前認(rèn)為,病原微生物與宿主之間復(fù)雜的免疫/炎癥反應(yīng)是膿毒癥主要病理生理機(jī)制之一,膿毒癥早期機(jī)體可能表現(xiàn)為失控的持久性炎癥反應(yīng),晚期則出現(xiàn)免疫抑制,導(dǎo)致患者死于繼發(fā)二次真菌、細(xì)菌或病毒感染[9-10]??v觀膿毒癥發(fā)展過程,炎癥和抗炎反應(yīng)之間的平衡至關(guān)重要[11]。因此我們?cè)谔接懩摱景Y的治療方案時(shí),應(yīng)首先考慮機(jī)體所處免疫狀態(tài)。糖尿病作為人口基數(shù)龐大的基礎(chǔ)疾病,高血糖影響患者機(jī)體免疫反應(yīng)以及免疫應(yīng)答的不同部分[12]。由此,本研究選擇建立糖尿病-膿毒癥復(fù)合動(dòng)物模型來模擬更真實(shí)的膿毒癥臨床現(xiàn)狀。
細(xì)胞因子是嚴(yán)重感染“炎癥反應(yīng)”的重要組成部分。間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞具有免疫調(diào)節(jié)特性[7],眾多研究人員著眼于其對(duì)膿毒癥的治療作用[8]。多個(gè)動(dòng)物模型研究表明,膿毒癥與多種細(xì)胞因子,包括 TNF?α、INF?γ、IL?10的釋放增加相關(guān),而消除或抑制這些細(xì)胞因子的釋放可改善動(dòng)物模型的生存[8,11,13-21]。一部分研究報(bào)道了MSC治療能降低促炎細(xì)胞因子,即 IFN?γ及 TNF?α的水平[13-14,18-24]。另一些研究則表明抗炎細(xì)胞因子IL?10的水平升高伴隨著其余抗炎細(xì)胞因子水平的降低[13-14,18-24],但還一些研究顯示MSC對(duì)IL?10水平的并無影響[15,22,25-26]。膿毒癥時(shí)肺臟主要表現(xiàn)為急性肺損傷或急性呼吸窘迫綜合征(acute lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome,ALI/ARDS),劇烈的炎癥反應(yīng)是其發(fā)病關(guān)鍵[27],研究表明膿毒癥時(shí)肺泡表面活性蛋白(surfactant protein,SP)水平升高,并可能導(dǎo)致預(yù)后不良和更高死亡風(fēng)險(xiǎn)[28-29]。
本研究顯示,CLP術(shù)后,隨著時(shí)間推移,非糖尿病與糖尿病膿毒癥大鼠的肺組織均出現(xiàn)血管擴(kuò)張、充血,肺泡結(jié)構(gòu)破壞,肺泡間隔增厚,以及肺泡腔和肺間質(zhì)內(nèi)紅細(xì)胞不斷增多等改變,但MSC干預(yù)在CLP術(shù)后24 h內(nèi)對(duì)肺組織這些病理改變并無改善。MSC干預(yù)在24 h以后對(duì)肺組織的病理改變有待進(jìn)一步觀察和研究。肺組織中SP?D、TNF?α和IFN?γ表達(dá)水平隨著時(shí)間的發(fā)展逐漸增加,IL?10水平則呈現(xiàn)“升高-下降-再升高-再下降”的趨勢(shì);MSC干預(yù)增加非糖尿病膿毒癥大鼠的肺組織SP?D、TNF?α與IL?10水平,減少IFN?γ水平;MSC干預(yù)減少糖尿病膿毒癥大鼠的肺組織SP?D與TNF?α水平,但對(duì)IFN?γ水平無影響,對(duì)IL?10水平起到先增加后減少的作用。原因考慮可能有以下幾點(diǎn)。
(1)本研究選用骨髓來源的間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞,而以往的部分研究選用脂肪來源的間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞[13,17,26]。ELMAN 等[17]認(rèn)為,骨髓來源的間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞作為細(xì)胞治療用于內(nèi)毒素性休克,比脂肪來源的間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞可能更有效。
(2)本研究著重關(guān)注細(xì)胞因子在肺組織中的表達(dá)水平,使用肺組織勻漿進(jìn)行檢測(cè)。以往的研究大多聚焦于這些細(xì)胞因子在血清或血漿中的水平變化[13-14,18-26],而較少著眼于其在具體臟器中的變化。SHIRLEY等[15]研究表明,MSC顯著降低了膿毒癥小鼠血漿中IL?6、IL?1β、IL?10的表達(dá)水平;但肺泡灌洗液中IL?10的表達(dá)水平則沒有受到影響。
(3)膿毒癥前3 d主要處于促炎反應(yīng)階段,而本研究中復(fù)合模型的觀察時(shí)間節(jié)點(diǎn)為CLP術(shù)后6、12、18以及24 h,正處于早期促炎反應(yīng)階段,即免疫活化狀態(tài)[30]。研究表明,體內(nèi)的炎癥狀態(tài)可能影響MSC的免疫抑制功能[31],而糖尿病可以損傷機(jī)體免疫功能,導(dǎo)致機(jī)體免疫平衡失調(diào),對(duì)于同樣的膿毒癥,T2DM機(jī)體或處于促炎反應(yīng)的高峰階段,此時(shí)糖尿病基礎(chǔ)的膿毒癥可能影響MSC的作用[31]。
綜上所述,通過建立糖尿病和非糖尿病大鼠膿毒癥模型,可觀測(cè)到糖尿病和非糖尿病大鼠對(duì)膿毒癥的炎癥反應(yīng)和器官損傷的不一致,可能與其各自體內(nèi)免疫狀態(tài)不同相關(guān)。間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞對(duì)膿毒癥的炎癥與器官損傷有影響,但其具體作用取決于機(jī)體免疫狀態(tài)及間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞干預(yù)時(shí)機(jī)的選擇;間充質(zhì)干細(xì)胞的體外免疫狀態(tài)及如何選擇干預(yù)時(shí)機(jī),尚在探索階段,需進(jìn)一步研究。
參考文獻(xiàn)
[1]SINGER M,DEUTSCHMAN C S,SEYMOUR C W,et al.The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock(Sepsis?3)[J].JAMA,2016,315(8):801.
[2]MAYR F B,YENDE S,ANGUS D C.Epidemiology of severe sepsis[J].Virulence,2014,5:4?11.
[3]ANGUS D C,LINDE?ZWIRBLE W T,LIDICKER J,et al.Ep?idemiology of severe sepsis in the United States:Analysis of in?cidence,outcome,and associated costs of care[J].Crit Care Med,2001,29(7):1303?1310.
[4]中華醫(yī)學(xué)會(huì)重癥醫(yī)學(xué)分會(huì).中國(guó)嚴(yán)重膿毒癥/膿毒性休克治療指南(2014)[J].中華危重病急救醫(yī)學(xué),2015,27(6):401?426.
[5]INTERNATIONAL DIABETES FEDERATION.International di?abetes federation diabetes atlas?7th edition[J].http://www.dia?betesatlas.org/,2015.
[6]RITTIRSCH D,HUBER?LANG M S,F(xiàn)LIERL M A,et al.Im?munodesign of experimental sepsis by cecal ligation and punc?ture[J].Nat Protoc,2009,4(1):31?36.
[7]CASTRO?MANRREZA M E,MONTESINOS J J.Immunoregula?tion by mesenchymal stem cells:biological aspects and clinical applications[J].J Immunol Res,2015,2015:1?20.
[8]LOMBARDO E.Mesenchymal stem cells as a therapeutic tool to treat sepsis[J].World J Stem Cells,2015,7(2):368.
[9]DELANO M J,WARD P A.The immune system′s role in sep?sis progression,resolution,and long?term outcome[J].Immu?nol Rev,2016:330?353.
[10]莫澤珣,陳蕊,肖飛,等.連續(xù)腎臟替代療法對(duì)老年重癥患者萬古霉素血藥濃度的影響[J].實(shí)用醫(yī)學(xué)雜志,2015,31(23):3857?3860.
[11]WIERSINGA W J,LEOPOLD S J,CRANENDONK D R,et al.Host innate immune responses to sepsis[J].Virulence,2013,5(1):36?44.
[12]賀能英,殷惠梅,陳珍,等.糖尿病基礎(chǔ)上的膿毒癥模型[J].實(shí)驗(yàn)動(dòng)物科學(xué),2016(2):1?5.
[13]GONZALEZ?REY E,ANDERSON P,GONZALEZ M A,et al.Human adult stem cells derived from adipose tissue protect against experimental colitis and sepsis[J].Gut,2009,58(7):929?939.
[14]N?METH K,LEELAHAVANICHKUL A,YUEN P S T,et al.Bone marrow stromal cells attenuate sepsis via prostaglandin E2?dependent reprogramming of host macrophages to increase their interleukin?10 production[J].Nat Med,2008,15(1):42?49.
[15]MEI S H J,HAITSMA J J,DOS SANTOS C C,et al.Mesen?chymal stem cells reduce inflammation while enhancing bacteri?al clearance and improving survival in sepsis[J].Am J Respir Crit Care Med,2010,182(8):1047?1057.
[16]HALL S R R,TSOYI K,ITH B,et al.Mesenchymal stromal cells improve survival during sepsis in the absence of heme oxy?genase?1:The Importance of Neutrophils[J].Stem Cells,2013,31(2):397?407.
[17]ELMAN J S,LI M,WANG F,et al.A comparison of adipose and bone marrow?derived mesenchymal stromal cell secreted factors in the treatment of systemic inflammation[J].J Inflamm(Lond),2014,11(1):1.
[18]LUO C,ZHANG F,ZHANG L,et al.Mesenchymal stem cells ameliorate sepsis?associated acute kidney injury in mice[J].Shock,2014,41(2):123?129.
[19]ZHAO X,LIU D,GONG W,et al.The toll?like receptor 3 li?gand,poly(I:C),improves immunosuppressive function and therapeutic effect of mesenchymal stem cells on sepsis via inhib?iting MiR?143[J].Stem Cells,2014,32(2):521?533.
[20]KRASNODEMBSKAYA A,SONG Y,F(xiàn)ANG X,et al.Antibac?terial effect of human mesenchymal stem cells is mediated in part from secretion of the antimicrobial peptide LL?37[J].Stem Cells,2010,28(12):2229?2238.
[21]YAGI H,SOTO?GUTIERREZ A,NAVARRO?ALVAREZ N,et al.Reactive bone marrow stromal cells attenuate systemic in?flammation via sTNFR1[J].Mol Ther,2010,18(10):1857?1864.
[22]CARLOS SEPULVEDA J,TOMéM,EUGENIA FERNáNDEZ M,et al.Cell senescence abrogates the therapeutic potential of human mesenchymal stem cells in the lethal endotoxemia model[J].Stem Cells,2014,32(7):1865?1877.
[23]WEIL B R,MANUKYAN M C,HERRMANN J L,et al.Mes?enchymal stem cells attenuate myocardial functional depression and reduce systemic and myocardial inflammation during endo?toxemia[J].Surgery,2010,148(2):444?452.
[24]WEIL B R,MANUKYAN M C,HERRMANN J L,et al.The immunomodulatory properties of mesenchymal stem cells:impli?cations for surgical disease[J].J Surg Res,2011,167(1):78?86.
[25]KRASNODEMBSKAYA A,SAMARANI G,SONG Y,et al.Human mesenchymal stem cells reduce mortality and bactere?mia in gram?negative sepsis in mice in part by enhancing the phagocytic activity of blood monocytes[J].Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol,2012,302(10):L1003?L1013.
[26]SHIN S,KIM Y,JEONG S,et al.The therapeutic effect of hu?man adult stem cells derived from adipose tissue in endotoxemic rat mode[lJ].Int J Med Sci,2013,10(1):8?18.
[27]MODRYKAMIEN A M,GUPTA P.The acute respiratory dis?tress syndrome[J].Proc(Bayl Univ Med Cent),2015,28(2):163?171.
[28]EISNER M D,PARSONS P,MATTHAY M A,et al.Plasma surfactant protein levels and clinical outcomes in patients with acute lung injury[J].Thorax,2003,58(11):983?988.
[29]MOKRA D,KOSUTOVA P.Biomarkers in acute lung injury[J].Respir Physiol Neurobiol,2015,209:52?58.
[30]BOOMER J S,GREEN J M,HOTCHKISS R S.The changing immune system in sepsis[J].Virulence,2014(1):45?56.
[31]LI W,REN G,HUANG Y,et al.Mesenchymal stem cells:a double?edged sword in regulating immune responses[J].Cell Death Differ,2012,19:1505?1513.