| Literature DB >> 30941060 |
Jianbin Zhang1, Qiangqiang Nie1,2, Chaozeng Si3, Cheng Wang4, Yang Chen5, Weiliang Sun6, Lin Pan6, Jing Guo6, Jie Kong1, Yiyao Cui1, Feng Wang2, Xueqiang Fan1, Zhidong Ye1, Jianyan Wen1, Peng Liu1,2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Varicose veins are a common problem worldwide and can cause significant impairments in health-related quality of life, but the etiology and pathogenesis remain not well defined. This study aims to elucidate transcriptomic regulations of varicose veins by detecting differentially expressed genes, pathways and regulator genes.Entities:
Keywords: GBP5; RNA-sequencing; guanylate-binding protein 5; interferon; varicose veins; weight gene co-expression network analysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 30941060 PMCID: PMC6433941 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2019.00278
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Demographics and clinical features of the patients.
| GSVs from CABG patients (7) | Varicose veins (13) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 62.9 ± 10.4 | 55.7 ± 10.9 | 0.166 |
| Gender (Male/Female) | 5/2 | 10/3 | 0.999 |
| BMI | 25.2 ± 4.1 | 25.4 ± 3.0 | 0.904 |
| Hypertension | 5 | 3 | 0.062 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 4 | 2 | 0.122 |
| Hyperlipidemia | 3 | 1 | 0.101 |
| Smoker | 2 | 1 | 0.270 |
FIGURE 1Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) analysis of varicose veins (VV) and great saphenous veins (GSV) from coronary artery bypass grafting (CAGB) patients. (A) PCA plot of all the samples. The VV group and CABG group show distinct separation. (B) Volcano plot of differentially expressed genes of VV vs. CABG. Green dots indicate downregulated genes, red dots indicate upregulated genes, and black dots indicate non-significance with cut-off criteria (P-value <0.05, abs (log2FC) >1). (C) DEGs were divided into four module genes with WGCNA analysis. The heatmap visualization of correlation between module genes and samples traits.
FIGURE 2Gene functional analysis of module brown genes. (A) Gene expression of module brown genes with RNA-seq data. (B) Gene ontology analysis and (C) Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis of module brown genes.
FIGURE 3Gene functional analysis of module gray genes. (A) Gene expression of module gray genes with RNA-seq data. (B) Gene ontology analysis of module gray genes.
FIGURE 4The immunohistochemistry staining showed that the expression of NLRP3, ASC and Caspase 1 were decreased in varicose veins. (A) Representative photomicrographs of immunohistochemistry staining for NLRP3. Box plot showed that the expression of NLRP3 significantly decreased in varicose veins. (B) Representative photomicrographs of immunohistochemistry staining for ASC. Box plot showed that the expression of ASC has a trend to decrease in varicose veins. (C) Representative photomicrographs of immunohistochemistry staining for Caspase 1. Results show a trend to decrease in varicose veins. ∗P < 0.05.
FIGURE 5The thickness of vascular wall, tunica intima, tunica media and collagen/smooth muscle ratio were significantly increased, the elastic fiber/internal elastic lamina ratio was decreased in varicose veins. (A) Representative photomicrographs of hematoxylin-eosin staining for vascular wall thickness. (B) Box plot showed that vascular wall thickness was significantly increased in varicose veins. (C) Representative photomicrographs of Vitoria blue staining for elastic fiber. (D) Box plot showed that the elastic fiber/internal elastic lamina ratio was decreased in varicose veins. (E) Representative photomicrographs of Masson staining for vascular smooth muscle and collagen. (F) Box plot showed that the collagen/smooth muscle ratio were significantly increased. ∗∗P < 0.01; ∗P < 0.05.
Histopathologic characteristics of GSVs from CABG patients and varicose veins.
| GSVs from CABG patients (7) | Varicose veins (13) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| VWT (μm)∗∗ | 435.0 ± 141.4 | 992.6 ± 441.5 | 0.005 |
| TIT (μm)∗ | 67.8 ± 22.8 | 247.6 ± 166.8 | 0.012 |
| TMT (μm)∗∗ | 212.8 ± 49.0 | 519.1 ± 221.6 | <0.001 |
| TET (μm) | 154.4 ± 96.5 | 226.0 ± 142.9 | 0.253 |
| Lemen area (mm2) | 2.1 ± 1.4 | 2.6 ± 1.2 | 0.211 |
| MD (mm) | 4.3 ± 1.9 | 3.5 ± 1.0 | 0.255 |
| Perimeter (mm) | 9.2 ± 4.0 | 8.8 ± 3.0 | 0.757 |
| CSMR∗ | 0.69 ± 0.16 | 1.37 ± 0.63 | 0.001 |
| EFIEL∗∗ | 0.020 ± 0.003 | 0.013 ± 0.004 | 0.001 |