4.7 Article

Circulating levels of hydrogen sulfide and substance P in patients with sepsis

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTION
Volume 75, Issue 4, Pages 293-300

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2017.07.005

Keywords

Hydrogen sulfide; Substance P; Sepsis; Infection; Systemic inflammatory response

Funding

  1. Intensive Care Foundation [111595.01.P.QN.]
  2. University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand [110465.01.P.PZ]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine alterations of circulating levels of hydrogen sulfide and substance P in patients with sepsis compared to non-sepsis patients with similar disease severity and organ dysfunction. Methods: This study included 23 septic and 14 non-septic patients during 2015-16 study period at the Christchurch Hospital Intensive Care Unit, Christchurch, New Zealand. Blood samples were collected from the time of admission to 96 h, with collection at different time points (0 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 96 h) and subjected to measurement of hydrogen sulfide, substance P, procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6 and lactate levels. Results: Patients with sepsis showed higher circulating hydrogen sulfide and substance P levels compared to patients without sepsis. Hydrogen sulfide levels were significantly higher at 12 h (1.45 vs 0.75 mu M; p < 0.05) and 24 h (1.11 vs 0.72 mu M; p < 0.01), whereas substance P levels were higher at 48 h (0.55 vs 0.31 ng/mL; p < 0.05). Increased hydrogen sulfide and substance P levels in septic patients were associated with increased levels of inflammatory mediators - procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and interleukin-6. Conclusions: These results provide evidence that higher circulating levels of hydrogen sulfide and substance P are associated with increased inflammatory response in patients with sepsis. (C) 2017 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available