S Kutzsche1, T Lyberg, L J Bjertnaes. 1. Institute of Clinical Medicine and Department of Anesthesiology, University of Tromsø, Tromsø, Norway.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether adenosine protects against endotoxin-induced increments in extravascular lung water content. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, animal study. SETTING: University research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Twenty-one anesthetized juvenile pigs. INTERVENTIONS: The animals were divided into two groups subjected to endotoxin infusion: Endotoxin alone (n = 7), or endotoxin combined with adenosine infusion (n = 7) administered during the whole experimental period. Two other groups were exposed to anesthesia alone (n = 4) or adenosine infusion alone (n = 3), respectively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Central hemodynamic variables and extravascular lung water, as assessed by the thermal dye dilution double indicator technique, were monitored. Plasma endothelin-1 concentrations were measured hourly. Extravascular lung water increased significantly in response to endotoxemia (p <.001) along with an increase in pulmonary microvascular pressure (P(mv) [p <.01]). Although the Pmv increased less in endotoxemic animals exposed to adenosine infusion, no intergroup difference was found. From 4 through 6 hrs, adenosine-treated pigs displayed only half of the extravascular lung water content of nontreated animals (p <.01). The latter did not differ from that of anesthetized controls receiving anesthesia or adenosine alone. Adenosine administered alone had no effect on P(mv). In pigs receiving adenosine alone, extravascular lung water content reached nadir after 3 hrs. In both endotoxin groups, plasma endothelin-1 concentration increased two-fold, peaking 4-6 hrs after the start of endotoxin infusion (p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: The endotoxin-induced increase in lung extravascular water was hampered by intravenously infused adenosine in the presence of a nonsignificantly reduced microvascular pressure. This leaves reduced microvascular permeability the most likely reason for the beneficial effect of adenosine.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether adenosine protects against endotoxin-induced increments in extravascular lung water content. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, animal study. SETTING: University research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Twenty-one anesthetized juvenile pigs. INTERVENTIONS: The animals were divided into two groups subjected to endotoxin infusion: Endotoxin alone (n = 7), or endotoxin combined with adenosine infusion (n = 7) administered during the whole experimental period. Two other groups were exposed to anesthesia alone (n = 4) or adenosine infusion alone (n = 3), respectively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Central hemodynamic variables and extravascular lung water, as assessed by the thermal dye dilution double indicator technique, were monitored. Plasma endothelin-1 concentrations were measured hourly. Extravascular lung water increased significantly in response to endotoxemia (p <.001) along with an increase in pulmonary microvascular pressure (P(mv) [p <.01]). Although the Pmv increased less in endotoxemic animals exposed to adenosine infusion, no intergroup difference was found. From 4 through 6 hrs, adenosine-treated pigs displayed only half of the extravascular lung water content of nontreated animals (p <.01). The latter did not differ from that of anesthetized controls receiving anesthesia or adenosine alone. Adenosine administered alone had no effect on P(mv). In pigs receiving adenosine alone, extravascular lung water content reached nadir after 3 hrs. In both endotoxin groups, plasma endothelin-1 concentration increased two-fold, peaking 4-6 hrs after the start of endotoxin infusion (p <.001). CONCLUSIONS: The endotoxin-induced increase in lung extravascular water was hampered by intravenously infused adenosine in the presence of a nonsignificantly reduced microvascular pressure. This leaves reduced microvascular permeability the most likely reason for the beneficial effect of adenosine.
Authors: Qing Lu; Elizabeth O Harrington; Julie Newton; Brian Casserly; Gregory Radin; Rod Warburton; Yang Zhou; Michael R Blackburn; Sharon Rounds Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2010-03-12 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Ketki Y Velankar; Mingyao Mou; Paul R Hartmeier; Benjamin Clegg; Ellen S Gawalt; Mo Jiang; Wilson S Meng Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2022-08-24 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Phillip Factor; Göskhan M Mutlu; Lan Chen; Jameel Mohameed; Alexander T Akhmedov; Fan Jing Meng; Tamas Jilling; Erin Rachel Lewis; Meshell D Johnson; Anna Xu; Daniel Kass; Janice M Martino; Amy Bellmeyer; John S Albazi; Charles Emala; H T Lee; Leland G Dobbs; Sadis Matalon Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Vladimir Kuklin; Mikhail Kirov; Mikhail Sovershaev; Thomas Andreasen; Ole C Ingebretsen; Kirsti Ytrehus; Lars Bjertnaes Journal: Crit Care Date: 2005-03-14 Impact factor: 9.097