4.3 Article

Mitochondria-Targeted Antioxidants SkQ1 and MitoTEMPO Failed to Exert a Long-Term Beneficial Effect in Murine Polymicrobial Sepsis

期刊

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2017/6412682

关键词

-

资金

  1. FWF, Austria
  2. Hertha-Firnberg [T707 B13]
  3. Integrated Research and Treatment Center-Center for Sepsis Control and Care (CSCC) at the Jena University Hospital
  4. German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [01 EO 1002, 01EO1502]
  5. National Research, Development and Innovation Office [NKFIH K116689]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondrial-derived reactive oxygen species have been deemed an important contributor in sepsis pathogenesis. We investigated whether two mitochondria-targeted antioxidants (mtAOX; SkQ1 and MitoTEMPO) improved long-term outcome, lessened inflammation, and improved organ homeostasis in polymicrobial murine sepsis. 3-month-old female CD-1 mice (n = 90) underwent cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) and received SkQ1 (5 nmol/kg), MitoTEMPO (50 nmol/kg), or vehicle 5 times post-CLP. Separately, 52 SkQ1-treated CLP mice were sacrificed at 24 h and 48 h for additional endpoints. Neither MitoTEMPO nor SkQ1 exerted any protracted survival benefit. Conversely, SkQ1 exacerbated 28-day mortality by 29%. CLP induced release of 10 circulating cytokines, increased urea, ALT, and LDH, and decreased glucose but irrespectively of treatment. Similar occurred for CLP-induced lymphopenia/neutrophilia and the NO blood release. At 48 h post-CLP, dying mice had approximately 100-fold more CFUs in the spleen than survivors, but this was not SkQ1 related. At 48 h, macrophage and granulocyte counts increased in the peritoneal lavage but irrespectively of SkQ1. Similarly, hepatic mitophagy was not altered by SkQ1 at 24 h. The absence of survival benefit of mtAOX may be due to the extended treatment and/or a relatively moderate-risk-of-death CLP cohort. Long-term effect of mtAOX in abdominal sepsis appears different to sepsis/inflammation models arising from other body compartments.

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

4.3
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