| Literature DB >> 24829922 |
Wenjuan Li1, Ruxing Zhao1, Jidong Liu2, Meng Tian1, Yiran Lu1, Tianyi He1, Meng Cheng1, Kai Liang1, Xia Li3, Xiangdong Wang3, Yu Sun1, Li Chen1.
Abstract
Pancreatic islet transplantation is a promising therapy to regain glycemic control in diabetic patients. The selection of ideal grafts is the basis to guarantee short-term effectivity and longevity of the transplanted islets. Contradictory to the traditional notion, recent findings implied the superiority of small islets for better transplantation outcomes rather than the large and intact ones. However, the mechanisms remain to be elucidated. Recent evidences emphasized the major impact of microcirculation on islet β -cell mass and function. And potentials in islet graft revascularization are crucial for their survival and preserved function in the recipient. In this study, we verified the distinct histological phenotype and functionality of small islets versus large ones both in vitro and in vivo. With efforts to exploring the differences in microcirculation and revascularization of islet grafts, we further evaluated local expressions of angiotensin and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) at different levels. Our findings reveal that, apart from the higher density of insulin-producing β -cells, small islets express less angiotensin and more angiotrophic VEGF-A. We therefore hypothesized a logical explanation of the small islet superiority for transplantation outcome from the aspects of facilitated microcirculation and revascularization intrinsically in small islets.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24829922 PMCID: PMC4009214 DOI: 10.1155/2014/192093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Diabetes Res Impact factor: 4.011
Figure 1Typical morphology of small and large islets incubated in vitro with indicated time. Note the expanded central reduction of light transmittance within the large ones.
Figure 2Distinct yield and islet cell viability between large and small islets freshly isolated. (a) Small islets are as twice to three times the amount of large ones isolated from each single batch of pancreas. (b) Islet cell viability analyzed by CKK-8 kit. Islet cells from freshly isolated small grafts are as much as 11% more viable than those from small ones (P = 0.0040).
Figure 3Small islets embrace more insulin-producing β-cells and function more vigorously. (a) Insulin immunostaining (brown) of islets in situ in the sectioned pancreas. Small islets showed an apparent more distinct and dense insulin staining compared with the large ones. (b) Immunoblotting of insulin in isolated islets of indicated size. (c) Quantification of insulin immunoblotting above. Small islets have more insulin reservation than large ones normalized to total protein content (P < 0.0001). (d) In vitro glucose stimulated insulin secretion assay of isolated islets. Small islets represent more potent insulin-secretion ability both in basal state (2.8 mM glucose) and after 16.7 mM glucose challenge (P = 0.0007 and P < 0.0001, resp.).
Figure 4IPGTT of rat recipients after PIT at indicated time points. (a) IPGTT of rat recipients after PIT at d10 and d40, respectively. At the 10th day after PIT, the glucose levels of indicated time after intraperitoneal glucose challenge were significantly higher in large islets PIT group than in small islets PIT group (P = 0.0335, 0.0106, 0.0002, 0.0507, 0.0078, and 0.0103 for 0 h, 0.5 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, and 3 h, resp.). At the 40th day, the small islets recipient group demonstrated a better glucose tolerance (P = 0.0074, 0.0002, 0.0028, 0.002, and 0.0026 and P < 0.0001 at 0 h, 0.5 h, 1 h, 1.5 h, 2 h, and 3 h, resp., during IPGTT). (b) Comparison of AUCs calculated from IPGTT curves above also indicated both better short-term effectivity and longevity of small islets transplantation (for both P < 0.0001).
Figure 5Small islets with less intrinsic Ang II-AT1 tension are nourished by adequate microcirculation. (a) Immunostains of CD31 (brown) in islets in situ from the sectioned pancreas. Small islets are embedded in a more adequate microcirculation reflected by a darker vascular endothelial marker staining. Quantification of local AT1 receptor expression by western blot (b) and qRT-PCR. (c) AT1 receptor is significantly less intensively expressed in small islets at both mRNA (P = 0.0321) and protein (P = 0.0007) levels. (Protein from the kidney tissue was arranged as positive control.) (d) The qRT-PCR analysis of angiotensinogen. Small islets again expressed less angiotensinogen verified at mRNA levels (P = 0.0079).
Figure 6Small islets expressed more abundant VEGF-A. Small islets are apparently enriched in intrinsical VEGF-A expression verified by immunostaining of VEGF-A (brown) in situ and western blot (b and c, P = 0.0010) as well as qRT-PCR (d) (P = 0.0002) of isolated islets.