4.1 Article

Type 2a sodium-phosphate co-transporter serves as a histological predictor of renal dysfunction and tubular apical damage in the kidneys of septic mice

Journal

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH-TOKYO
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 251-258

Publisher

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2220/biomedres.30.251

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Technology, Sports and Culture of Japan [20590398, 18590369]
  2. Osaka Kidney flank [OKF03-0011]
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [18590369, 20590398] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Acute renal failure (ARF) Occurs in septic patients and is histologically characterized by tubular apical damages, including brush border breakdown. Nevertheless, little information is available to identify the apical injury at a molecular level. Type 2a Na-phosphate (Pi) co-transporter (NaPiT2a) is constitutively expressed by brush borders of proximal tubules under a healthy condition. Therefore, we investigated if NaPiT2a could be used as a negative marker to predict the renal dysfunction, using an animal model of septic ARF. After the treatment of lipopolysaccharide (LPS), mice manifested the tubular apical injury and renal dysfunction, as evidenced by the increase in blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels. Immunohistochemical examination revealed that the expression of NaPiT2a by renal proximal tubules became faint, being reciprocal to the development of tubular hypoxia during sepsis. Inversely, the loss in apical NaPiT2a was restored in a regenerating stage, associated with the recovery from renal hypoxia. Overall, there was a negative correlation between the NaPiT2a expression and BUN levels or tubular injury scores in septic mice. Our data indicate that the loss of NaPiT2a is a reliable marker for predicting the progression of septic ARF, while local hypoxia might be involved in the decrease of NaPiT2a expression.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available