4.5 Article

The Emulsified PFC OxycyteA® Improved Oxygen Content and Lung Injury Score in a Swine Model of Oleic Acid Lung Injury (OALI)

期刊

LUNG
卷 194, 期 6, 页码 945-957

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00408-016-9941-9

关键词

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); Tissue oxygenation; Perfluorocarbon (PFC); Oleic acid (OA); Resuscitation and oleic acid-induced lung injury (OALI)

资金

  1. U.S. Army Defense Health Program [60115HP.3720.001.A1016]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) can transport 50 times more oxygen than human plasma. Their properties may be advantageous in preservation of tissue viability in oxygen-deprived states, such as in acute lung injury. We hypothesized that an intravenous dose of the PFC emulsion Oxycyte(A (R)) would improve tissue oxygenation and thereby mitigate the effects of acute lung injury. Intravenous oleic acid (OA) was used to induce lung injury in anesthetized and instrumented Yorkshire swine assigned to three experimental groups: (1) PFC post-OA received Oxycyte(A (R)) (5 ml/kg) 45 min after oleic acid-induced lung injury (OALI); (2) PFC pre-OA received Oxycyte(A (R)) 45 min before OALI; and (3) Controls which received equivalent dose of normal saline. Animals were observed for 3 h after OALI began, and then euthanized. The median survival times for PFC post-OA, PFC pre-OA, and control were 240, 87.5, and 240 min, respectively (p = 0.001). Mean arterial pressure and mean pulmonary arterial pressure were both higher in the PFC post-OA (p < 0.001 for both parameters). Oxygen content was significantly different between PFC post-OA and the control (p = 0.001). Histopathological grading of lung injury indicated that edema and congestion was significantly less severe in the PFC post-OA compared to control (p = 0.001). The intravenous PFC Oxycyte(A (R)) improves blood oxygen content and lung histology when used as a treatment after OALI, while Oxycyte(A (R)) used prior to OALI was associated with increased mortality. Further exploration in other injury models is indicated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据