Burn injury can be a devastating traumatic injury, with long-term personal and social implications for the patient. The many complex local and disseminating pathological processes underlying burn injury's clinical challenges are orchestrated from the site of injury and develop over time, yet few studies of the molecular basis of these mechanisms specifically explore the local signaling environment. Those that do are typically destructive in nature and preclude the collection of longitudinal temporal data. Burn injury therefore exemplifies a superficial temporally dynamic pathology for which experimental sampling typically prioritizes either specificity to the local burn site or continuous collection from circulation. Here, we present an exploratory approach to the targeted elucidation of complex, local, acutely temporally dynamic interstitia through its application to burn injury. Subcutaneous microdialysis is coupled with ultraperformance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS) analysis, permitting the application of high-throughput metabolomic profiling to samples collected both continuously and specifically from the burn site. We demonstrate this workflow's high yield of burn-altered metabolites including the complete structural elucidation of niacinamide and uric acid, two compounds potentially involved in the pathology of burn injury. Further understanding the metabolic changes induced by burn injury will help to guide therapeutic intervention in the future. This approach is equally applicable to the analysis of other tissues and pathological conditions, so it may further improve our understanding of the metabolic changes underlying a wide variety of pathological processes.
Burn injury can be a devastating traumatic injury, with long-term personal and social implications for the patient. The many complex local and disseminating pathological processes underlying burn injury's clinical challenges are orchestrated from the site of injury and develop over time, yet few studies of the molecular basis of these mechanisms specifically explore the local signaling environment. Those that do are typically destructive in nature and preclude the collection of longitudinal temporal data. Burn injury therefore exemplifies a superficial temporally dynamic pathology for which experimental sampling typically prioritizes either specificity to the local burn site or continuous collection from circulation. Here, we present an exploratory approach to the targeted elucidation of complex, local, acutely temporally dynamic interstitia through its application to burn injury. Subcutaneous microdialysis is coupled with ultraperformance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS) analysis, permitting the application of high-throughput metabolomic profiling to samples collected both continuously and specifically from the burn site. We demonstrate this workflow's high yield of burn-altered metabolites including the complete structural elucidation of niacinamide and uric acid, two compounds potentially involved in the pathology of burn injury. Further understanding the metabolic changes induced by burn injury will help to guide therapeutic intervention in the future. This approach is equally applicable to the analysis of other tissues and pathological conditions, so it may further improve our understanding of the metabolic changes underlying a wide variety of pathological processes.
Microdialysis
is a sampling
method allowing in vivo collection of solutes primarily from the extracellular
interstitium.[1] The technique consists of
inserting a porous probe into a target tissue and perfusing it with
physiological saline, allowing passive uptake of molecules from the
extracellular milieu. This sampling method enables the collection
of continuous, longitudinal data from specific sites and can be applied
to elucidating localized and temporally dynamic physiological or pathophysiological
processes. Microdialysis has been used extensively to explore molecular
mechanisms in a variety of pathologies and tissues including skin,[2] adipose tissue,[3] muscle,[4] liver,[5] heart,[6] eye, and brain.[7,8]Microdialysate
is traditionally analyzed using targeted analytical
platforms such as radioimmunoassays or enzyme-linked immunosorbent
assays (ELISAs).[9] By design, this restricts
the range of measured analytes to those included in the assay. Conversely,
untargeted “omics” techniques are not limited to analyzing
a predetermined selection of molecules; they characteristically measure
as many molecules as possible without bias. Such “global”
profiling approaches generally attain a high yield of data, exceeding
the capacity of targeted assays.[10−12] Further, because of
the platforms’ exploratory approach, these data typically include
molecules not previously considered or identified within the given
tissue or pathology. Among the “omics” techniques, metabolomics,
the study of small (typically <2 kDa) molecules, has proven viable
in elucidating the chemical composition of various sample types with
both targeted[13] and global[14] experimental designs. Specifically, global metabolomics
has been applied to microdialysates collected from various tissues
such as muscle,[4] liver,[5] and brain,[15] but not yet to
skin microdialysate. Global metabolomics typically utilizes one of
two analytical platforms: mass spectrometry (MS) preceded by a separation
method such as liquid or gas chromatography, or nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR) spectroscopy.[14,16,17] While NMR has the advantage of being nondestructive, ultraperformance
liquid chromatography (UPLC)–MS is capable of higher resolution
multivariate data acquisition[18,19] and can detect lower
analyte concentrations from smaller sample volumes than other platforms.[19,20] In order to achieve maximum metabolome coverage, platform selection
should therefore depend on the characteristics of the sample. Microdialysate
is typically collected in the low microliter per minute range and
dilutes the uptaken molecules during recovery,[1] indicating that assay sensitivity should be a priority.Burn
injury, one of the most common traumatic skin pathologies,
can induce severe tissue denaturation and local inflammatory reactions,
significantly altering the chemical composition of the cutaneous interstitium.
These changes can underlie the development of excruciating pain and
progress to life-threatening systemic inflammatory states.[21] Despite significant advances in burn care and
mortality reduction, effective treatment of burn injury-associated
systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and pain remains a
major clinical challenge. This may be addressed with an enhanced understanding
of the chemical characteristics of the postburn interstitium. Here,
the viability of global metabolomics was considered as a tool for
measuring burn injury-induced time-dependent changes in the cutaneous
interstitial metabolite profile. Specifically, UPLC–MS was
applied to the analysis of continuously collected microdialysates
sampled simultaneously from naive and burn-injured skin for the identification
of changes to the interstitial metabolomic profile over time, enabling
the measurement of individual metabolites discriminating between physiological
and pathological tissue states. Both polar analytes and lipids were
profiled in a single analysis—with a run time of 12 min—and
key metabolites discriminating between burn-injured and control sites
were structurally elucidated. The discovery of these molecules should
enhance our understanding of the changes in metabolic processes occurring
in burn injury and may ultimately enable guidance of therapeutic interventions.
Experimental
Section
Materials
The drugs used for anesthesia were isoflurane
(Abbott, Maidenhead, U.K.) and urethane (Sigma, Gillingham, U.K.).
Ringer’s solution (sodium chloride, potassium chloride, calcium
chloride, and sodium bicarbonate) used as microdialysis perfusate
was obtained from Baxter (Northampton, U.K.). Solvents for metabolite
extraction from microdialysates (LC–MS grade water and methanol)
were obtained from Sigma (Gillingham, U.K.). Prepared samples were
placed in Total Recovery MS vials (Waters) for UPLC–MS analysis.
The chromatography solvents were water (LC–MS Chromasolv grade;
Sigma) and methanol (LC–MS Chromasolv grade; Sigma), used with
an HSS T3 column (1.8 μm, 100 mm × 2.1 mm; Waters Corporation,
U.S.A.). Formic acid, leucine enkephalin, and sodium formate were
obtained from Sigma. Nicotinamide (niacinamide) and uric acid, used
as standards, were also obtained from Sigma.
Animals
All procedures
were performed in accordance
with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, the revised
National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals, the Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of
the Council on the Protection of Animals Used for Scientific Purposes,
and the guidelines of the Committee for Research and Ethical Issues
of IASP published in . We observed good laboratory practice, and
all procedures on animals were approved by veterinary services (Central
Biological Services) at Imperial College London, U.K.Four male
Sprague–Dawley rats (125–200 g) were housed in climate-controlled
rooms on a 12 h light/dark cycle and with food and water ad libitum.
They were briefly sedated with inhalational isoflurane (5%) before
induction of general anesthesia with 1.5 g/kg urethane by intraperitoneal
(ip) injection. Body temperature was monitored and maintained at 37
°C with a heat blanket, rectal thermometer, and homeothermic
control unit (50-7061-F; Harvard Apparatus). Animals were terminally
anesthetized by intraperitoneal sodium pentobarbital (40 mg) and decapitated
upon completion of microdialysis.
Microdialysis and Burn
Model
Microdialysis was conducted
with 400 μm 3000 kDa (3 MDa) cutoff microdialysis catheters
(Dermal Dialysis, Erlanger, Germany). The probes had an inner diameter
of 340 μm, a membrane thickness of 50 μm, and a pore size
of 0.3 μm and were perfused with Ringer’s solution at
2 μL/min with a model “22” syringe pump (Harvard
Apparatus). Microdialysis probes were briefly perfused to lubricate
their exteriors, easing insertion. Probes were then inserted into
the dermis of the dorsal aspects of both hind paws, leaving the skin
through exit punctures with an active uptake distance of 10 mm. The
attached 25 G insertion needles were subsequently removed to expose
the probe outlets for sample collection.Probes were inserted
into the skin prior to the burn in order to allow for both a 20 min
equilibration period, during which outflow rates stabilize, and a
30 min “flush” period, during which the interstitium
recovers from probe insertion. This flush period will be referred
to as the “postprobe insertion baseline”. Equilibration
period microdialysates were discarded, while postprobe insertion baseline
microdialysates were used for comparison of the preburn metabolic
profiles between both microdialysis sites. While 30 min has proven
sufficient for fluidics and tissue stabilization following probe insertion,[22] microdialysis was presently conducted for a
combined total of 50 min prior to burn induction.The deep partial-thickness
burn was induced as described previously
by submerging one hind paw in 60 °C saline to the ankle for 2
min while the contralateral paw was simultaneously submerged in room
temperature saline.[23,24] Microdialysis was conducted for
0.5 h preburn and 3 h postburn. Microdialysates were collected in
half hour fractions for time series analysis (Figure ) and were stored at −80 °C.
Microdialysis sites were excised for verification of probe depth after
the animal was sacrificed. A full description of all samples collected
and analyzed using UPLC–MS is given in Table S1.
Figure 1
Classes of microdialysate fractions collected over the
course of
each experiment and their corresponding time points for both burn
and control sites. The colors correspond to the data derived from
these samples presented in Figure .
Classes of microdialysate fractions collected over the
course of
each experiment and their corresponding time points for both burn
and control sites. The colors correspond to the data derived from
these samples presented in Figure .
Figure 4
Deep partial-thickness
burn injury alters the metabolic profile
of subcutaneous microdialysate. PCA scores plots indicate clear separation
of burn (red) from control (black) and preinjury (blue) microdialysate
samples, as well as tight quality control (QC) sample (green) grouping
with both ESI+ (A) and ESI– modes (B). Each data point represents
an individual microdialysate fraction. The divergence of the burn
site data is consistent with a progressive effect of the burn on the
interstitium as all time points are included. PCA t1 and t2 values
were 0.196 and 0.109 for the positive-mode PCA and 0.239 and 0.13
for the negative-mode data. Subsequent PLS-DA constructed well-fitting,
highly predictive models for both ESI+ [C; R2X(cum) 0.363, R2Y(cum)
0.985, Q2(cum) 0.939] and ESI– [D; R2X(cum) 0.601, R2Y(cum)
0.996, Q2(cum) 0.97] with score plots expressing separation between
postburn burn and control site metabolic profiles. Red, burn; black,
control; green, quality control; blue, postprobe insertion baseline.
Sample Collection
The resistance to manual insertion
of the guide needle was lower in the subcutis than in the dermis and
could be used as a guide for probe depth during insertion. Probes
were inserted such that the semipermeable membrane began at the skin
border and the proximal portion was entirely enclosed by nonpermeable
polypropylene tubing. The probe was shortened distal to the active
uptake site to further minimize exposure of the semipermeable membrane
to the outer environment and therefore evaporation. Histological analysis
confirmed the positioning of the probe at the dermal border of the
subcutaneous tissue and the deep partial thickness of the burn, which
extended to the reticular dermis.[23]
Sample
Preparation
Half-hour microdialysate fractions
(∼50 μL, following an apparent loss of ∼10 μL
perfusate to the tissue and/or evaporation) first underwent protein
precipitation by dilution 1:3 in −20 °C methanol and vortexing
for 20 s.[25] The resulting 240 μL
samples were stored at −20 °C for 20 min before being
centrifuged for 10 min at 12 000 rpm for the removal of insoluble
precipitates and protein. Supernatants were transferred to clean tubes
and dried in a vacuum concentrator (Eppendorf Concentrator Plus “Speed
Vac”) in V-AQ mode at 45 °C for 2 h. Dried samples were
resuspended and sonicated in 50 μL of LC–MS grade water
(Sigma) before transfer to Total Recovery vials (Waters Corp., U.S.A.).
Quality control samples (QCs) were prepared by combining 5 μL
from each sample to form a representative pool.[26] The complete workflow is illustrated in Figure .
Figure 2
Microdialysate sampling
and analysis workflow, showing the major
steps progressing to metabolite identification.
Microdialysate sampling
and analysis workflow, showing the major
steps progressing to metabolite identification.
UPLC–MS Analysis
UPLC–MS analysis was
performed using an Acquity UPLC system (Waters Corp., U.S.A.) with
an HSS T3 column (1.8 μm; 100 mm × 2.1 mm, Waters Corp.,
U.S.A.) coupled to a Synapt G2-S Q-TOF mass spectrometer (Waters MS
Technologies, U.K.) operating in both positive (ESI+) and negative
(ESI−) electrospray ionization modes. Chromatography was performed
with a 5 μL injection volume at 40 °C and a flow rate of
400 μL/min with solvents A (0.1% formic acid in water) and B
(0.1% formic acid in methanol). The 12 min gradient, concluding with
2 min of re-equilibration, was designed as follows: 0–1 min,
1% B (hold); 1–3 min, 1–15% B (linear); 3–6 min,
15–50% B (linear); 6–9 min, 50–95% B (linear);
9–10 min, 95% B (hold); 10–10.1 min, 1% B (linear),
10.1–12 min, 1% B (hold). ESI+ and ESI– modes were both
performed with a 30 V cone voltage, 120 °C source temperature,
450 °C desolvation temperature, 900 L/h desolvation gas flow,
and 50 L/h cone gas flow but with capillary voltages of 1 and −1
kV, respectively. The Synapt was operated in sensitivity mode with
acquisition ranging between m/z 100
and 1200, a scan time of 0.1 s, an interscan delay of 0.01 s, and
centroid mode data collection. Leucine enkephalin (MW 555.62; 200
pg/μL in 50:50 acetonitrile/water) was used as the lock mass
with an analyte-to-reference scan ratio of 10:1. Lock mass scans were
collected every 30 s and averaged over three scans to perform mass
correction. Prior to the analysis, the instrument was calibrated using
0.5 mM sodium formate. The QC sample was first used to condition the
column with 10 consecutive injections, and then subsequently injected
after every 10 sample injections to monitor system stability and run
time effects.[26] The sample run order was
randomized.
Data Processing and Statistical Analysis
Data (ESI+
and ESI– mode) were converted to netCDF format using DataBridge
within MassLynx software v4.1 (Waters Inc.) and exported for use with
the freeware XCMS.[27] XCMS detected peaks
within the raw data using the centWave algorithm[28] with a 3–15 s peak width window and a 30 ppm mass
accuracy window. A 0.1 Da m/z width
was used for grouping, which prior to retention time correction employed
a 10 s bandwidth. Following retention time correction, the bandwidth
was determined by a specific feature’s retention time deviation
profile. Data were normalized via median fold normalization to control
for any variation in overall sample concentration and underwent a
variance-stabilizing transformation to convert multiplicative noise
into additive noise.[29] The XCMS output
consisted of a table of metabolite features reported by mass-to-charge
ratio (m/z) value, retention time,
and peak area and contained isotopes, adducts, and fragments as separate
features. This output was analyzed in Simca V.13.0.3 (Umetrics, Sweden)
using principal components analysis (PCA). Data underwent pareto scaling
and a logarithmic transformation [10 log(peak height +20)]. Scores
plots were used to examine the interrelationship—or lack thereof—between
data grouped into three classes: (preburn) postprobe insertion baseline
microdialysates (from both burn and control sites), burn microdialysates,
and control microdialysates. After confirming separation between the
burn and control data, partial least-squares discriminant analysis
(PLS-DA) was applied to rank variables (metabolite features) contributing
to the difference via their variable influence on projection (VIP)
values; a cutoff of >2 was considered sufficient for further evaluation.
Model robustness was evaluated based on R2X values reflecting the
fraction of X variables that are explained by the
model, and R2Y values reflecting the fraction of variation of Y values that are explained by the model. Cross-validation
analysis of variance (CV-ANOVA), a diagnostic tool for assessing the
reliability of PLS models, was applied for model validation.
Metabolite
Structural Assignment
The m/z measurements of features meeting the PLS-DA VIP
cutoff (>2.0) were screened for likely parent ions by excluding
isotopes,
adducts, and fragments among feature groups with a shared retention
time. From these, candidates for structural elucidation via tandem
mass spectrometry (MS/MS) were selected on the basis of signal and
VIP strength and, in some cases, further sharing an m/z ratio with a potentially clinically relevant
metabolite as returned by searches of the HMDB[30,31] and Metlin[32] databases.MS/MS was
performed using the same Acquity UPLC system (Waters Corp., U.S.A.)
with an HSS T3 column (1.8 μm, 100 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.7 μm;
Waters Corp., U.S.A.) coupled to a Synapt G2-S Q-TOF (Waters MS Technologies,
U.K.). Chromatographic and MS source parameters were the same as for
the MS experiments, though with a collision energy ramp of 10–40
V. The fragmentation profiles obtained for each feature were compared
with those available in the above databases for entries with matching m/z measurements, or with previously published
spectra. Further MS/MS analysis was performed, in which microdialysate
samples were analyzed alongside authentic standards under identical
UPLC–MS/MS conditions. The m/z measurements, chromatographic retention times, and fragmentation
profiles of the features within the sample and the standard solution
were compared to confirm or exclude the target’s proposed molecular
structure.
Data Availability
Data will be deposited
in Metabolights
(https://www.ebi.ac.uk/metabolights/) to be made publicly available.
Results and Discussion
Sampling
Considerations
The selection of a perfusion
rate balances the inverse relationship between relative recovery (the
solute concentration in the microdialysate relative to the tissue)
and absolute recovery (the total amount of solute recovered), which
is complicated by the increasing influence of solvent ultrafiltration
and convection (“solvent drag”) with higher perfusion
rates. Here, relative recovery was prioritized over absolute recovery,
and hence sample concentration over volume, in utilizing a low perfusion
rate (2 μL/min). While robust experimental designs employing
UPLC–MS require repeated sample injections for multiple analytical
steps and can further apply alternative protocols increasing coverage
(e.g., additional ionization modes), the platform’s sensitivity
still allows for low perfusion rates and sample volumes such as those
in the present work. The probe’s MW cutoff, which far exceeds
the size of the intended analytes at 3000 kDa, is evidently viable
for the recovery of metabolites. Similarly, the perfusate (Ringer’s
solution), sample storage temperature (−80 °C) and preparation,
and the active probe uptake length (10 mm) prove applicable for microdialysate
analysis by UPLC–MS.
Analytical Considerations
Reliable
metabotype definition
requires consistent analyte separation and detection. Chromatographic
performance was evaluated by the intensity (peak area) and spread
of chromatographic peaks across the run time, indicating gradient
suitability and confirming the recovery of analytes through microdialysis
at concentrations detectable by UPLC–MS using both positive-
and negative-mode ionization (Figure , parts A and B). Both water-soluble and moderately
polar analytes—rather than hydrophobic metabolites—were
retained and detected as expected due to the fluid state of the interstitium.
However, the overlapping early eluting peaks indicate the presence
of many hydrophilic compounds; these could be separated via hydrophilic
interaction chromatography (HILIC), enhancing metabolome coverage
with the present sample preparation in combination with reversed-phase
(RP) chromatography. The present peak separation supports the viability
of our gradient’s design in extending denser elution periods
(Figure , parts A
and B), along with all associated performance parameters.
Figure 3
UPLC–MS
(ESI+ and ESI−) chromatograms of burn site
microdialysate and solvent gradient. The presence and intensity of
peaks recorded from a a single burn site microdialysate fraction in
ESI+ (A) and ESI– mode (B) and the spread of elution times
indicates the viability of both ionization modes and the present solvent
gradient (C) for wide metabolome coverage. t0 = 0.43 min.
UPLC–MS
(ESI+ and ESI−) chromatograms of burn site
microdialysate and solvent gradient. The presence and intensity of
peaks recorded from a a single burn site microdialysate fraction in
ESI+ (A) and ESI– mode (B) and the spread of elution times
indicates the viability of both ionization modes and the present solvent
gradient (C) for wide metabolome coverage. t0 = 0.43 min.
Burn Injury Affects the Metabolic Profile
of Microdialysate
Having confirmed the separation and detection
of potentially hundreds
of analytes by UPLC and their presence at concentrations detectable
by MS, PCA was applied for multivariate comparison of burn and control
data and detection of outliers (Figure , parts A and B).
The PCA plots were generated via the analysis of 42 364 and
13 829 metabolite features for positive and negative ESI mode,
respectively. Whether recorded using ESI+ (Figure A) or ESI– (Figure B), clear separation can be observed between
microdialysates collected from burned tissue and both the postprobe
insertion baseline samples (i.e., those collected from either site
prior to the burn) and the control site, as evidenced by the clustering
in PC1. The grouping of the postprobe insertion baseline samples indicates
that both microdialysis sites had a similar metabotype prior to the
burn, while the tight QC sample grouping indicates acquisition stability
over the course of the experiment. Three samples were outlying in
the ESI– data, likely due to sample contamination, and were
removed from further analysis. These samples did not show as outliers
in the ESI+ data and were therein retained for further analysis.Deep partial-thickness
burn injury alters the metabolic profile
of subcutaneous microdialysate. PCA scores plots indicate clear separation
of burn (red) from control (black) and preinjury (blue) microdialysate
samples, as well as tight quality control (QC) sample (green) grouping
with both ESI+ (A) and ESI– modes (B). Each data point represents
an individual microdialysate fraction. The divergence of the burn
site data is consistent with a progressive effect of the burn on the
interstitium as all time points are included. PCA t1 and t2 values
were 0.196 and 0.109 for the positive-mode PCA and 0.239 and 0.13
for the negative-mode data. Subsequent PLS-DA constructed well-fitting,
highly predictive models for both ESI+ [C; R2X(cum) 0.363, R2Y(cum)
0.985, Q2(cum) 0.939] and ESI– [D; R2X(cum) 0.601, R2Y(cum)
0.996, Q2(cum) 0.97] with score plots expressing separation between
postburn burn and control site metabolic profiles. Red, burn; black,
control; green, quality control; blue, postprobe insertion baseline.As shown previously,[23] probe insertion
is itself a pathological event. While trauma can be minimized with
careful insertion of a sufficiently thin and lubricated probe, a “flush”
period is required for stabilization of the extracellular interstitium.
Given the consistency between postprobe insertion baseline (preburn)
and control-site metabolic profiles, and their divergence from the
burn profiles exhibited via PCA (indicated by their groupings in Figure , parts A and B),
any effect of probe insertion was negligible compared to that of the
burn. In any case, should any transient effect of the probe insertion
have been measured, postprobe insertion baseline data were not used
to identify metabolites discriminating between burn and control metabolomes.The spread of samples observed in PC2 of the PCA plots indicates
a difference in metabolic profiles within the study groups. A larger
difference can be observed within the burn group compared with controls,
likely as a consequence of intersubject and time-dependent differences
in response to the burn trauma. In particular, three distinct sample
groupings can be observed in the ESI– burn data (Figure B; red); the two groups furthest
removed from the rest of the data represent burn samples from two
individual animals, demonstrating the influence of intersubject variability.
However, the clarity of the unsupervised separation between burn and
control data suggests that the burn is an outstanding source of variation
in the data.Supervised PLS-DA was therefore applied for a comparison
specifically
between the burn and control data, in which separation was clear and
intersubject variability was less evident (indicating continuity between
the burn metabolomes of different subjects within this analysis).
PLS-DA plots were generated using the same 42 364 and 13 829
features for ESI+ and ESI– mode, respectively. PLS-DA constructed
well-fitting, highly predictive models for both ESI+ [Figure C; R2X(cum) 0.363, R2Y(cum)
0.985, Q2(cum) 0.939] and ESI– [Figure D; R2X(cum) 0.601, R2Y(cum) 0.996, Q2(cum)
0.97] data. Model robustness was affirmed using CV-ANOVA for both
ESI+ (p = 6.20095 × 10–22)
and ESI– (p = 3.547 × 10–19). Metabolic profile variables representing metabolites (i.e., features)
were ranked by their correlation with class separation, quantified
as variable influence on projection (VIP) values, to identify those
expressing an experimental effect. Features exceeding a predetermined
VIP threshold of >2.0 were prioritized for structural elucidation.
Both PLS-DA models yielded subsets of burn-altered features that were
viable for screening, with 2187 and 757 features exceeding the VIP
threshold in the ESI+ and ESI– data, respectively. The top
30 metabolite features—as ranked by their VIP value—are
reported for ESI+ and ESI– mode in Table S2. Interestingly, the concentrations of all metabolite features
contained in Table S2 and all features
selected for structural elucidation were increased at the burn site.
Structural Identification of Metabolites Altered after Burn
Injury
Having identified features exhibiting different abundances
between burn and control samples via PLS-DA, a subset of features
were selected for MS/MS analysis. Each feature was selected for its
high VIP value, signal intensity, and level of fragmentation profile
detail. Of 84 target metabolites, two included features, m/z 123.1/83 (ESI+) and m/z 167/85 (ESI−), had high respective VIP values of
2.04 and 2.01, as reflected in the clarity of a burn effect in their
temporal profiles (Figure , parts A and B). Through MS/MS analysis, comparison with
fragmentation data from online databases (Figure , parts A and B), and consecutive analysis
of the target feature and its respective authentic standard under
identical UPLC–MS conditions (Figure C–F), these two features were confirmed
to be niacinamide (Figure , parts A, C, and E) and uric acid (Figure , parts B, D, and F), respectively. Further
identification of altered metabolites is ongoing, in order to gain
a deeper understanding of the metabolic changes occurring.
Figure 5
High-VIP metabolite
features were elevated in burn injury microdialysates.
Features m/z 123.1/83 (A) and 167/85
(B) yielded high VIP values (2.04 and 2.01, respectively), reflecting
that they were among the metabolites contributing most to the separation
between burn and control data in the PLS-DA. This was evident in the
difference between their burn and control site temporal profiles.
Signal intensities are log-transformed and expressed as mean ±
SEM.
Figure 6
Microdialysate feature fragmentation profiles
and retention times
were matched with reference HMDB spectra and authentic standard solutions
for the structural elucidation of niacinamide and uric acid as burn-elevated
interstitial metabolites. Similar mass spectra were recorded (A and
B) between experimental data (red) and reference HMDB spectra (blue),
overlaid, indicating the structural similarity of the parent features m/z 123.1/83 (A) and 167/98 (B) to niacinamide
(A) and uric acid (B), respectively. Major fragments within these
spectra are annotated with their expected molecular structures. Retention
times of the endogenous target metabolites were identical to those
of niacinamide (C) and uric acid (E), respectively. MS/MS fragmentation
profiles were highly reproducible between the target features and
their respective standard solutions, confirming the molecular identities
of m/z 123.1/83 and 167/98 as niacinamide
(D) and uric acid (F), respectively. Red, data recorded presently
from unidentified feature; blue, externally sourced profile; black,
data from authentic standard solution.
High-VIP metabolite
features were elevated in burn injury microdialysates.
Features m/z 123.1/83 (A) and 167/85
(B) yielded high VIP values (2.04 and 2.01, respectively), reflecting
that they were among the metabolites contributing most to the separation
between burn and control data in the PLS-DA. This was evident in the
difference between their burn and control site temporal profiles.
Signal intensities are log-transformed and expressed as mean ±
SEM.Microdialysate feature fragmentation profiles
and retention times
were matched with reference HMDB spectra and authentic standard solutions
for the structural elucidation of niacinamide and uric acid as burn-elevated
interstitial metabolites. Similar mass spectra were recorded (A and
B) between experimental data (red) and reference HMDB spectra (blue),
overlaid, indicating the structural similarity of the parent features m/z 123.1/83 (A) and 167/98 (B) to niacinamide
(A) and uric acid (B), respectively. Major fragments within these
spectra are annotated with their expected molecular structures. Retention
times of the endogenous target metabolites were identical to those
of niacinamide (C) and uric acid (E), respectively. MS/MS fragmentation
profiles were highly reproducible between the target features and
their respective standard solutions, confirming the molecular identities
of m/z 123.1/83 and 167/98 as niacinamide
(D) and uric acid (F), respectively. Red, data recorded presently
from unidentified feature; blue, externally sourced profile; black,
data from authentic standard solution.
Niacinamide Is Elevated in the Postburn Interstitium
Niacinamide
(nicotinamide) is the amide in vivo product of nicotinic
acid (niacin, vitamin B3) and is also a precursor of the coenzymes
nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide
phosphate (NAD-P). Pharmacological applications of niacinamide exert
antipruritic, antimicrobial, and vasoactive effects[33] and are protective in various inflammatory cutaneous conditions,[34−36] though it is not known if these occur at concentrations generated
endogenously.[33] Niacinamide has not been
used to treat burn injury clinically, though it enhances wound healing
upon systemic administration[37] and corrects
postburn nicotinamide coenzyme system imbalances[38] experimentally. The present work is therefore the first
to report the elevation of niacinamide in burn injury. Given its extensive
anti-inflammatory effects[39] and protective
roles in experimental burn injury,[37,38] its potential
function as an endogenous regulator of local inflammation and its
therapeutic viability for burn injury in clinical settings should
be explored.
Interstitial Uric Acid Is Elevated Postburn
Uric acid
is a heterocyclic compound generated during purine nucleotide metabolism.
It crystallizes at high concentrations, as underlies its principal
pathological implication in gout; uric acid crystals deposit in joints,
tendons, and surrounding tissues, leading to inflammation.[40] Further, excess circulating uric acid has been
associated with hypertension, metabolic syndrome, coronary artery
disease, cerebrovascular disease, vascular dementia, pre-eclampsia,
and kidney disease.[41] Circulating uric
acid is elevated in the plasma of severely burned patients,[42] consistent with its systemic regulation by renal
clearance[43] and the high frequency of acute
kidney injury postburn.[44,45] However, its elevation
has been implicated in acute kidney injury’s pathogenesis and
inflammatory effects and therefore may not simply be a consequence
of impaired renal function.[46−49] The current findings are consistent with a previous
study identifying elevated uric acid in rat plasma, one of few previous
metabolomic studies of burn injury.[43] However,
the present work is the first report of uric acid’s local interstitial
increase postburn. The elevation’s specificity to the burn
site suggests either that uric acid does not disseminate systemically
within the 3 h time course of this experiment, or that uric acid does
not perfuse into the subcutis from the circulation. In either case,
uric acid sourced at the burn site may both mediate local inflammation
and disseminate, contributing to its increased circulatory availability
alongside impaired renal clearance and global tissue hypoxia-induced
elevation of xanthine oxidase activity.[47,49] Exploring
the roles of locally sourced uric acid and hypoxia, and their interaction,
in postburn inflammation and kidney function could present an avenue
for therapeutic intervention in burn injury.
Conclusion
The present work exemplifies a metabolomic analysis applicable
to samples collected by microdialysis, demonstrating the viability
of various incorporated experimental design elements including the
sampling technique, RP chromatography and column choice, the solvent
gradient, and application of both ESI+ and ESI– ionization
modes. Collectively, these constitute a novel configuration for the
collection and metabolomic analysis of interstitial fluid. Importantly,
while experimental designs collecting longitudinal data are often
limited to systemic sampling methods, microdialysis allows for the
collection of continuous data that is specific to the collection site.
It is therefore ideal for the investigation of temporally dynamic
superficial interstitia, as was exemplified in its present application
to deep partial-thickness burn injury. The amount and detail of the
metabolic data collected in this context, including the full structural
elucidation of two novel local metabolites among extensive further
metabolome coverage, demonstrate the viability of UPLC–MS as
a highly sensitive exploratory platform for microdialysate analysis.
Further investigation of these metabolites, particularly in the context
of human studies, can improve our understanding of the complex processes
occurring during burn injury and potentially guide therapeutic interventions.
We expect that this workflow could be similarly applied to many varying
tissues and pathological states and encourage its utilization in further
research areas.
Authors: Laura G Sánchez-Lozada; Edilia Tapia; José Santamaría; Carmen Avila-Casado; Virgilia Soto; Tomás Nepomuceno; Bernardo Rodríguez-Iturbe; Richard J Johnson; Jaime Herrera-Acosta Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Chandra S Chaurasia; Markus Müller; Edward D Bashaw; Eva Benfeldt; Jan Bolinder; Ross Bullock; Peter M Bungay; Elizabeth C M DeLange; Hartmut Derendorf; William F Elmquist; Margareta Hammarlund-Udenaes; Christian Joukhadar; Dean L Kellogg; Craig E Lunte; Carl Henrik Nordstrom; Hans Rollema; Ronald J Sawchuk; Belinda W Y Cheung; Vinod P Shah; Lars Stahle; Urban Ungerstedt; Devin F Welty; Helen Yeo Journal: J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.126
Authors: Glenn M Chertow; Elisabeth Burdick; Melissa Honour; Joseph V Bonventre; David W Bates Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2005-09-21 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Colin A Smith; Grace O'Maille; Elizabeth J Want; Chuan Qin; Sunia A Trauger; Theodore R Brandon; Darlene E Custodio; Ruben Abagyan; Gary Siuzdak Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: A Ahsan Ejaz; Wei Mu; Duk-Hee Kang; Carlos Roncal; Yuri Y Sautin; George Henderson; Isabelle Tabah-Fisch; Birgit Keller; Thomas M Beaver; Takahiko Nakagawa; Richard J Johnson Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2006-12-06 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Dominic Friston; Sini Junttila; Julia Borges Paes Lemes; Helen Laycock; Jose Vicente Torres-Perez; Elizabeth Want; Attila Gyenesei; Istvan Nagy Journal: Dis Model Mech Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 5.758