| Literature DB >> 26578348 |
A Vatankhah1,2, J Halász3,4, V Piurkó5,6, T Barbai7,8, E Rásó9,10, J Tímár11,12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The local immune responses to chronic echinococcal infections in various organs are largely unknown. Since the liver is the most frequently involved organ in such infections in human we aimed to characterize the inflammatory as well as immune cell infiltrate around hydatid cysts in the liver and compared to common inflammatory processes of the liver.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26578348 PMCID: PMC4647452 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-1252-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Pathology of the liver biopsies of patients with cystic echinococcosis (CE, n = 21), steatosis (SH, n = 11) and chronic hepatitis (CH, n = 11)
| Sample Groups | Range of Age (Year) | Sex | Pathology | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male (n) | Female (n) | Intrabiliary Rupture (n) | Portal Fibrosis (n) | Periportal Fibrosis (n) | Septal Fibrosis (n) | Ductular Reaction (n) | ||
| CE | 41 ± 19.31 | 7 | 14 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 1 | - |
| SH | 26 ± 22.31 | 7 | 4 | - | 5 | - | 2 | 8 |
| CH | 26 ± 19.31 | 7 | 4 | - | 7 | - | 1 | 7 |
Fig. 1Localization of leukocytes and macrophages in liver biopsies. a/b Localization of neutrophil leukocytes as detected by MPO immunohistochemistry in CH (a) and CE (b) samples. Note the decreased density in CE biopsy. c/d Localization of macrophages by CD68 immunchemistry in CH (c) and CE (d) biopsies. Note the significant infiltration of macrophages in CH (c) and decreased presence in CE sample (d). Bar: 100 μm
Density of inflammatory cells of the liver in cystic echinococcosis, steatosis and chronic hepatitis biopsy samples
| CE | SH | CH | p Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marker | Cells/field (mean ± SD) | Cells/field (mean ± SD) | Cells/field (mean ± SD) | CE vs. SH | CE vs. CH | SH vs. CH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CD3 | 265 ± 138.66 | 232 ± 198.11 | 241 ± 143.89 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| CD4 | 29 ± 18.94 | 24 ± 22.86 | 57 ± 46.16 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FOXP3 | 4 ± 4.53 | 10 ± 8.64 | 20 ± 29.87 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| CD20 | 230 ± 174.86 | 50 ± 53.78 | 140 ± 128.50 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data are mean number of immunostained cells (M) ± SD in CE (cystic echinococcosis), SH (Steatosis), and CH (chronic hepatitis) biopsies as determined in Materials and Methods section. Value of significance (p) has been exhibited for differences between sample groups in pair
MPO Myeloperoxidase (presented in bold)
Fig. 2Localization of cytotoxic T cells and dendritic cells in liver biopsies. a/b Identification of cytotoxic T cells by CD8 immunohistochemistry in CH (a) and CE (b) samples. Note the significant portal and lobular presence of CD8 + T cells in CH (c) and a decreased infiltration in CE sample (b). c/d Identification of dendritic cells in liver biopsies using CD1a immunohistochemistry. Note the complete absence of CD1a + cells in CE (d) as compared to CH (c) sample. Bar: 100 μm
mRNA expression levels of costimulatory molecules in inflammatory infiltrates of the liver in cystic echinococcosis, steatosis and chronic hepatitis biopsy samples
| Costimulatory Molecules | CE | SH | CH | P Value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | CE vs SH | CE vs CH | SH vs CH | |
| CTLA4 | 0.073 ± 0.099 | 0.182 ± 0.233 | 5.293 ± 16.949 | 0.1 | 0.07 | 0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| CD80 | 50.779 ± 67.682 | 54.731 ± 74.778 | 67.712 ± 98.575 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.5 |
| CD86 | 61.528 ± 117.973 | 27.526 ± 33.573 | 62.451 ± 89.896 | 0.2 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Expression of costimulatory molecules was quantified by calculating the ratio of target mRNA level to a background houskeeping β-actin mRNA and was defined as mean ± SD for three sample groups: cystic echinococcosis (CE), steatosis (SH) and chronic hepatitis (CH) (presented in bold)
Fig. 3Correlation between quantity of CD4+T cells and mRNA expression level of costimulatory CTLA4 molecule in liver samples. a = CE, b = SH, c = CH biopsies. Statistical analysis identified only significant correlation between the two factors in CH samples (c)
Fig. 4Correlation between CD86 and CD80 mRNA expression levels in liver biopsies. Statistical analysis identified significant correlation in CE (a) and CH (c) samples where no such correlation was detected in SH materials (b)