| Literature DB >> 30654825 |
Ryo Uchimido1, Eric P Schmidt2, Nathan I Shapiro3.
Abstract
The glycocalyx is a gel-like layer covering the luminal surface of vascular endothelial cells. It is comprised of membrane-attached proteoglycans, glycosaminoglycan chains, glycoproteins, and adherent plasma proteins. The glycocalyx maintains homeostasis of the vasculature, including controlling vascular permeability and microvascular tone, preventing microvascular thrombosis, and regulating leukocyte adhesion.During sepsis, the glycocalyx is degraded via inflammatory mechanisms such as metalloproteinases, heparanase, and hyaluronidase. These sheddases are activated by reactive oxygen species and pro-inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-1beta. Inflammation-mediated glycocalyx degradation leads to vascular hyper-permeability, unregulated vasodilation, microvessel thrombosis, and augmented leukocyte adhesion. Clinical studies have demonstrated the correlation between blood levels of glycocalyx components with organ dysfunction, severity, and mortality in sepsis.Fluid resuscitation therapy is an essential part of sepsis treatment, but overaggressive fluid therapy practices (leading to hypervolemia) may augment glycocalyx degradation. Conversely, fresh frozen plasma and albumin administration may attenuate glycocalyx degradation. The beneficial and harmful effects of fluid and plasma infusion on glycocalyx integrity in sepsis are not well understood; future studies are warranted.In this review, we first analyze the underlying mechanisms of glycocalyx degradation in sepsis. Second, we demonstrate how the blood and urine levels of glycocalyx components are associated with patient outcomes. Third, we show beneficial and harmful effects of fluid therapy on the glycocalyx status during sepsis. Finally, we address the concept of glycocalyx degradation as a therapeutic target.Entities:
Keywords: Fibroblast growth factor; Fluid therapy; Glycocalyx; Glycocalyx degradation; Heparan sulfate; Hyaluronan; Sepsis; Syndecan; Vascular endothelial cell
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30654825 PMCID: PMC6337861 DOI: 10.1186/s13054-018-2292-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Crit Care ISSN: 1364-8535 Impact factor: 9.097
Fig. 1Endothelial glycocalyx structure during health and degradation during sepsis. MMP metalloproteinase, S1P sphingosine-1-phosphate, ICAM-1 intercellular adhesion molecule 1, VCAM-1 vascular cell adhesion molecule 1
Clinical studies investigating the association of glycocalyx levels with clinical outcomes
| Year | Authors | Design | Patients population | Patient classification | N | Outcome | Brief result | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Syndecan-1 | 2008 | Nelson et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Cont vs Septic shock | 18 vs 18 | septic shock | Septic shock significantly higher median syndecan-1 vs healthy controls (246 [IQR 180-496] vs 26 ng/ml, [23 - 31], p<0.01) |
| Septic shock | 18 | Mortality | No significant association of syndecan-1 with mortality | |||||
| Septic shock | 18 | Severity | Septic shock significantly higher median syndecan-1 vs healthy controls (246 ng/mL, [180-496] vs 26 ng/ml, [23 - 31], p<0.01) | |||||
| 2011 | Steppan et al. [ | Obsevational | (not specifically referred ) | Cont vs Abdominal surgery vs Severe sepsis or septic shock | 18 vs 28 vs 104 | Severe sepsis or septic shock | Septic patients significantly higher mean syndecan-1 than healthy control (160±109 vs 20.5± 5.1 ng/mL, p<0.001) and than surgery patients (50.5±46.9 ng/mL, p=0.001) | |
| Severe sepsis or septic shock | 104 | Level of IL-6 | Syndecan-1 significantly correlated with IL-6 (p=0.004) | |||||
| 2012 | Sallisalmi et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Cont vs Septic shock | 20 vs 20 | septic shock | Septic shock higher median syndecan-1 vs controls (p<0.0001) | |
| Septic shock | 20 | Severity | syndecan-1 corelates with SOFA score (r=0.654, p<0.002) | |||||
| Septic shock | 20 | Level of VAP-1 | syndecan-1 correlated with VAP-1 level (r=0.729, p<0.0001) | |||||
| 2013 | Ostrowski et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Experimental endotoxemia vs Severe sepsis or septic shock | 9 vs 20 | Presence of Severe sepsis or septic shock | Septic patients had higher syndecan-1 vs experimental endotoxemia patients (172 ± 102 VS 51 ± 12 ng/mL, p <0.05) | |
| Severe sepsis or septic shock | 20 | Severity | No significant correlations of syndecan-1 level with SOFA score (r=0.42, p=NS) and SAPS2(r=0.04, p=NS) | |||||
| Severe sepsis or septic shock | 20 | Level of biomarkers | Syndecan-1 correalted with noradrenaline (r=0.45, p=0.045), adrenaline(r=0.62, p=0.004), lactate(r=0.77, p<0.001), APTT(r=0.63, p=0.005), INR(r=0.57, p=0.013) | |||||
| 2014 | Donati et al. [ | RCT | Intensive care unit | Non-leukodepleted RBC transfusion vs leukodepleted RBC transfusion | 10 vs 10 | Level of syndecan-1 | In non-leukodepleted RBC transfusion group, the median level of syndecan-1 was significantly increased. No significant association between syndecan-1 and leukodepleted RBC transfusion | |
| 2014 | Johansson et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Severe sepsis or septic shock | 67 | Treatment with noradrenalin infusion at the time of blood sampling | No significant association between syndecan and noradrenaline infusion. (p=0.902, data not shown) | |
| Severe sepsis or septic shock not treated with noradrenaline infusion at blood sampling | 53 | Level of biomarkers | Significant correlations of syndecan-1 level with noradrenaline (r=0.29, p=0.034), sTM(r=0.35, p=0.01), hcDNA(r=0.29, p=0.038), protein C(r=-0.56, p<0.0001), tPA(r=0.44, p=0.001), sVEGFR1(r=0.56, p<0.0001), Ang-1(r=-0.51, p<0.001), Ang-2(r=- 0.40, p=0.003), TFPI(r=0.44, p=0.001), platelet count(r=-0.45, p=0.001), creatinine(r=0.34, p=0.012), bilirubin(r=0.45, p=0.001) | |||||
| Severe sepsis or septic shock not treated with noradrenaline infusion at blood sampling | 53 | Presence of septic shock | Significant correlation of syndecan-1 level with shock. (r=0.40, p=0.003) | |||||
| Severe sepsis or septic shock not treated with noradrenaline infusion at blood sampling | 53 | Severity | There were significant correlations of syndecan-1 level with SOFA score (r=0.33, p=0.027) and SAPS2 (r=0.33, p=0.015) | |||||
| 2015 | Straat et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | non-bleeding critically ill patients | 33 | Level of syndecan-1 | The median level of syndecan-1 after fresh frozen plasma transfusion was significantly lower than the level before the transfusion (565 [IQR 127–1176] ng/mL vs 675 [IQR 132–1690] ng/mL, p=0.01) | |
| 2015 | Ostrowski et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Severe sepsis or septic shock | 184 | Coagulopathy | There were siginificant associations of syndecan-1 with TEG R-time (β: 0.64 ± 0.25, p=0.013), TEG MA (β: -1.78 ± 0.87, p=0.042) and FF MA (β: -0.84 ± 0.42, p=0.045) | |
| 2015 | Ostrowski et al. [ | Obsevational | Department of internal medicine | No infection vs Local infection vs Sepsis vs Severe sepsis vs Septic shock | 50 vs 63 vs 95 vs 100 vs 13 | Presence of severe sepsis or septic shock | Septic shock (61 ng/mL, [IQR 39 - 119], p<0.05), severe sepsis (61 ng/mL, [IQR 35 - 95], p<0.05) had a significantly higher median level of syndecan than sepsis (31 ng/mL, [IQR 22 - 50]) | |
| No infection or Local infection or Sepsis or Severe sepsis or Septic shock | 321 | 28 days mortality | There was a significant association of the median syndecan-1 level with comulative survival over 28days. (p=0.029) | |||||
| 2016 | Anand et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Cont vs Sepsis vs Severe sepsis vs Septic shock | 50 vs 15 vs 45 vs 90 | Presence of sepsis | Septic shock (653.5 ng/mL, [IQR 338.93 - 1430.23], p<0.001), severe sepsis(342.1 ng/mL, [IQR 130 - 568.1], p<0.001) and sepsis patitents(85.78 ng/mL, [IQR 40.16 - 141.2], p<0.001) had a significantly higher median level of syndecan than healthy control(28.15 ng/mL, [IQR 7.47 - 45.7]) | |
| Sepsis or Severe sepsis or Septic shock | 150 | 90 days mortality | Non-survivor had a significantly higher median level of syndecan-1 than survivor (782 ng/mL, [IQR 235.5 - 1514.31 vs 412.3 ng/mL, [IQR 135.25 - 855.34]; p=0.007). AUC of syndecan-1 level for mortality was 0.644 [95%CI 0.54-0.74]. There was a significant association of the cut off level of syndecan-1:625 ng/ml on DAY 1 ICU admission with comulative survival on Kaplan-Meier plot (p=0.003) | |||||
| Sepsis or Severe sepsis or Septic shock | 150 | Severity | There were significant correlations between syndecan-1 levels level with SOFA score (r=0.437, p<0.001) and APACHE2 score (r=0.294, p<0.001). | |||||
| 2016 | Puskarich et al. [ | Obsevational | Emergency department | Severe sepsis or septic shock | 175 | Intubation | Intubated patients had syndecan-1 similar to non-intubated patients (181 ng/mL [61 - 568] vs 141 ng/mL [46 - 275], p=0.06) | |
| Severe sepsis or septic shock | 175 | Mortality | Non-survivor had a significantly higher level of syndecan-1 than survivor ( 223 ng/mL [67 - 464] vs 142 ng/mL [38 - 294], p=0.04) | |||||
| Severe sepsis or septic shock | 175 | Development of AKI | Patients with AKI developlment had a significantly higher level of syndecan-1 than those without AKI development (193 ng/mL [IQR, 63 - 441] vs 93 ng/mL [IQR 23 - 187], p<0 .001) | |||||
| Heparan sulfate | 2011 | Steppan et al. [ | Obsevational | not shown | Cont vs Abdominal surgery vs Severe sepsis or septic shock | 18 vs 28 vs 104 | Severe sepsis or septic shock | Septic patients had a significantly higher mean level of heparan sulfate than healthy control (3.23 ± 2.43 μg/ml vs 1.96 ± 1.21 μg/ml, p = 0.03). Septic patients had a significantly lower mean level of heparan sulfate than surgery patients (3.23 ± 2.43 μg/ml vs 7.96 ± 3.26 μg/ml, p <0.001) |
| 2014 | Nelson et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Cont vs Septic shock | 24 vs 24 | septic shock | Septic shock patients had a significantly higher mean level of heparan sulfate than control (p<0.001, data not shown) | |
| Septic shock | 24 | Severity | There was a significant correlation between heparan sulfate level with SOFA score (r=0.47, p=0.02) | |||||
| Septic shock | 24 | Mortality | Non-survivor had a significantly higher mean level of heparan sulfate than survivor (p=0.02, data not shown) | |||||
| Septic shock | 24 | Level of biomarkers | There were no significant correlations of heparan sulfate level with the levels of IL-6 (r=0.40, p=0.06), IL-10 (r=0.34, p=0.10), CRP (r=-0.19, p>0.3), and MPO (r=0.21, p>0.3) | |||||
| 2016 | Schmidt et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Severe trauma vs Septic shock | 25 vs 30 | Septic shock | Septic shock patients had a significantly highe mean level of heparan sulfate than sever trauma patitents (p<0.05, data not shown) | |
| No AKI development vs AKI development in Septic shock | 16 vs 14 | Development of AKI | Patient who developed AKI had a significantly higher mean level of heparan sulfate than those who do not (p<0.05, data not shown) Non adjusted AUC for the development of AKI was 0.7634 (p=0.014). Aadjusted AUC was not significant (data not shown) | |||||
| Septic shock | 30 | Mortality | Non-survivor had a significantly higher mean level of heparan sulfate than survivor (p<0.05, data not shown) | |||||
| Non adjusted AUC for the mortality was 0.86 (p=0.0009) Adjusted AUC was 0.91 (p=0.0003) | ||||||||
| Hyaluronan | 2012 | Yagmur et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | No SIRS vs SIRS vs Sepsis(sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock) without cirrhosis | 20 vs 33 vs 97 | Sepsis | Septic patients(344 μg/ml [IQR 0 – 2641]) had a significantly higher median level of hyaluronan than No SIRS (115.5 μg/L [IQR 10 – 2457], p=0.014) and SIRS patients (168 μg/L [IQR 0 – 2117], p=0.015) |
| Severity | Hyaluronan correalted with SOFA score (r=0.278, p=0.001) | |||||||
| Level of biomarkers | Hyaluronan correlated with Procalcitonin(r=0.46, p<0.001), CRP (r=0.34, p<0.001), IL-6 (r=0.34, p=0.004) and IL-10 (r=0.38, p=0.001) | |||||||
| 2014 | Nelson et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Cont vs Septic shock | 24 vs 24 | Septic shock | Septic had a significantly higherdisaccharides from hyaluronan than control (p<0.001) | |
| Septic shock | 24 | Severity | Hyaluronan correlated with SOFA score (r=0.47, p=0.02) | |||||
| Septic shock | 24 | Mortality | Non survivor had a significantly higher disaccharides from hyaluronan than survivor (p=0.006, data not shown) | |||||
| 2016 | Schmidt et al. [ | Obsevational | Intensive care unit | Sever trauma vs Septic shock | 25 vs 30 | Septic shock | Septic shock patients had a significantly higher level of hyaluronan than sever trauma patitents (p<0.05, data not shown) | |
| No AKI development vs AKI development in Septic shock patients | 16 vs 14 | Development of AKI | Patient who developed AKI had a significantly higher level of hyaluronan than not (p<0.05, data not shown) | |||||
| Septic shock | 30 | Mortality | Non adjusted AUC for the development of AKI was 0.75 (p=0.018) | |||||
| Adjusted AUC was 0.77 (p=0.01) | ||||||||
| Non survivor had a significantly higher level of hyaluronan than survivor (p<0.05, data not shown) | ||||||||
| Non adjusted AUC for the mortality was 0.86 (p=0.0009). Adjusted AUC was not significant (data not shown) |
Abbreviation: SOFA sequential organ failure assessment, IL-6 Interleukin-6, VAP-1 vascular adhesion protein-1, NS not significant, SAPS simplified acute physiology score, RCT randomized control trial, RBC red blood cell, sVEGFR1 soluble vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, hcDNA histone-complexed, sTM soluble thrombomodulin, tPA tissue-type plasminogen activator, Ang-1 angiopoietin-1, Ang-2 angiopoietin-2, TFPI tissue factor pathway inhibitor, IQR interquartile range, TEG thrombelastography, MA maximum amplitude, FF functional fibrinogen, BUN blood urea nitrogen, ICU intensive care unit, APACHE acute physiology and chronic healthevaluation, AKI acute kidney injury, CRP C-reactive protein, MPO myeloperoxidase, IL-10 Interleukin-10, AUC area under the receiver operating characteristic curve