| Literature DB >> 27066189 |
Yasar Yildirim1, Esma Gulsum Cellad2, Ali Veysel Kara1, Zülfükar Yilmaz1, Ali Kemal Kadiroglu1, Mehmet Veysi Bahadir3, Mesut Gul3, Muzaffer Aydin Ketani4, Mehmet Emin Yilmaz1.
Abstract
Our aim was to evaluate effect of etanercept on oxidative stress parameters in rats with experimental peritonitis and investigate the availability of etanercept usage in the treatment of peritonitis in the future. Twenty-eight rats were divided into four groups as control (group 1), peritonitis (group 2), peritonitis + cefazolin sodium (group 3), and peritonitis + cefazolin sodium + etanercept (group 4). Peritoneal tissue and blood samples were taken from all of the rats for histopathological and biochemical examination. The oxidative stress parameters were examined in blood and tissue samples. It was observed that rats with peritonitis benefit from cefazolin sodium treatment. Evaluating the effectiveness of etanercept was our main objective for this study. In this perspective, we compared group 3 and group 4 and found statistically significant decreases in oxidative parameters and statistically significant increases in antioxidants in serum and tissue samples in group 4. It is observed that there was a significant contribution of etanercept on biochemical and also histopathological results. As a result, the TNF-α inhibitor, etanercept, in addition to antibiotics given in the early treatment of peritonitis results in more significant improvement of histopathological and oxidative parameters as compared to antibiotics alone.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27066189 PMCID: PMC4808678 DOI: 10.1155/2016/9418468
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oxid Med Cell Longev ISSN: 1942-0994 Impact factor: 6.543
Histopathological scoring system for the tissue evaluation.
| Absent | Minimal | Weak | Moderate | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
Comparison of serum and tissue oxidant and antioxidant parameters.
| Parameters | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| Serum | ||||
| MDA (mmol/mL) | 0.73 ± 0.17 | 1.67 ± 0.32d | 1.28 ± 0.21b | 0.90 ± 0.26c,e |
| TOS ( | 33.59 ± 11.23 | 80.30 ± 11.26d | 52.73 ± 12.48c | 39.07 ± 7.07c,e |
| NO ( | 4.85 ± 0.39 | 5.80 ± 0.46a | 5.41 ± 0.32c | 4.90 ± 0.32b,c |
| TNF- | 2.72 ± 1.45 | 18.50 ± 10.01a | 9.01 ± 2.06b | 5.77 ± 2.34b,c |
| TAC (mmol/L) | 1.32 ± 0.10 | 0.87 ± 0.30a | 1.18 ± 0.10b | 1.56 ± 0.11e,f |
| PON (U/L) | 197.03 ± 37.63 | 124.61 ± 15.81a | 145.67 ± 7.75b | 157.70 ± 10.25b,c |
| Peritoneal tissue | ||||
| MDA (mmol/mL) | 0.12 ± 0.25 | 1.31 ± 0.41d | 0.59 ± 0.35b | 0.12 ± 0.07c,e |
| TOS ( | 7.16 ± 3.53 | 45.90 ± 26.57a | 14.18 ± 4.58b | 8.77 ± 4.11b,c |
| NO ( | 3.95 ± 0.87 | 6.65 ± 1.36a | 6.00 ± 0.52 | 5.29 ± 0.22b,c |
| TNF- | 116.39 ± 42.36 | 487.21 ± 238.44a | 265.22 ± 52.74b | 136.83 ± 24.26b,f |
| TAC (mmol/L) | 0.80 ± 0.11 | 0.34 ± 0.08d | 0.47 ± 0.064b | 0.66 ± 0.14c,e |
| PON (U/L) | 12.74 ± 3.32 | 1.83 ± 2.54d | 4.82 ± 1.37b | 8.34 ± 1.14e,f |
MDA: malondialdehyde, NO: nitric oxide, TNF-α: tumor necrosis factor alpha, TAC: total antioxidant capacity, TOS: total oxidant stress, and PON: paraoxonase.
a p < 0.005 as compared to group 1, b p < 0.005 as compared to group 2, c p < 0.005 as compared to group 3, d p < 0.001 as compared to group 1, e p < 0.001 as compared to group 2, and f p < 0.001 as compared to group 3.
Figure 1Microscopic findings of the parietal peritoneum in groups ((1) control group, (2) peritonitis group, (3) peritonitis + cephazolin sodium group, and (4) peritonitis + cephazolin sodium + etanercept group).
Histopathological results.
| Histopathological results | Control group (group 1) | Peritonitis group (group 2) | Peritonitis + cephazolin sodium group (group 3) | Peritonitis + cephazolin sodium + etanercept group (group 4) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peritoneal epithelial shedding (desquamation) | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 3.71 ± 0.48a | 2.71 ± 0.48c | 1.0 ± 0.57c.e |
| Congestion | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 4.0 ± 0.0b | 2.42 ± 0.78c | 1.28 ± 0.48c.f |
| Neutrophil infiltration | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 4.0 ± 0.0b | 2.28 ± 0.48c | 1.14 ± 0.37d.e |
| Edema | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 3.71 ± 0.48a | 1.85 ± 0.69c | 1.14 ± 0.37c.f |
a p < 0.01 as compared to group 1, b p < 0.001 as compared to group 1, c p < 0.01 as compared to group 2, d p < 0.001 as compared to group 2, e p < 0.01 as compared to group 3, and f p < 0.05 as compared to group 3.