| Literature DB >> 33100902 |
Mengdie Shen1, Bibi Zhang2, Mengyao Wang2, Li'na Meng2,3,4, Bin Lv2,3,4.
Abstract
AIM: To explore the treatment effect of mica on 2,4,6-trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid solution- (TNBS-) induced colitis in mice.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33100902 PMCID: PMC7569463 DOI: 10.1155/2020/3070345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mediators Inflamm ISSN: 0962-9351 Impact factor: 4.711
Disease activity index.
| Weight loss (%) | Stool consistency∗ | Occult/gross bleeding | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| (-) | Normal | Normal | 0 |
| 1-5 | 1 | ||
| 5-10 | Loose | Guaiac (+) | 2 |
| 11-15 | 3 | ||
| >15 | Diarrhea | Gross bleeding | 4 |
The disease activity index = (combined score of weight loss, stool consistency, and bleeding)/3. ∗Normal stools = well-formed pellets; loose = pasty stools which do not stick to the anus; diarrhea = liquid stools that stick to the anus.
Macroscopic damage score.
| Macroscopic damage | Score |
|---|---|
| Normal colonic mucosa | 0 |
| Local hyperemia, no ulcer | 1 |
| Single ulcer, no obvious inflammation | 2 |
| A single ulcer with inflammation | 3 |
| Two or more ulcers with inflammation | 4 |
| Large ulcer with inflammation | 5 |
Histological grading of colitis.
| Feature graded | Grade | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Inflammation | 0 | None |
| 1 | Slight | |
| 2 | Moderate | |
| 3 | Severe | |
|
| ||
| Extend | 0 | None |
| 1 | Mucosa | |
| 2 | Mucosa and submucosa | |
| 3 | Transmural | |
|
| ||
| Regeneration | 4 | No tissue repair |
| 3 | Surface epithelium not intact | |
| 2 | Regeneration with crypt depletion | |
| 1 | Almost complete regeneration | |
| 0 | Complete regeneration or normal tissue | |
|
| ||
| Crypt damage | 0 | None |
| 1 | Basal 1/3 damaged | |
| 2 | Basal 2/3 damaged | |
| 3 | Only surface epithelium intact | |
| 4 | Entire crypt and epithelium lost | |
|
| ||
| Percent involvement | 1 | 1-25% |
| 2 | 26-50% | |
| 3 | 51-75% | |
| 4 | 76-100% | |
Figure 1(a) Weight loss in each group and (b) disease activity index in each group.
Weight loss (%).
| Group |
| D2-1 | D3-2 | D4-3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 10 | 1.35 ± 1.00 | 4.41 ± 3.39 | 6.31 ± 2.88 |
| TNBS group | 9 | −15.19 ± 4.04▲ | −17.69 ± 4.97▲ | −17.63 ± 6.45▲ |
| Mica group | 9 | −6.30 ± 1.84▲■ | −12.87 ± 4.99▲■ | −11.29 ± 5.30▲■ |
|
| 176.144 | 155.118 | 260.946 |
▲ P < 0.01 vs. control; ■P < 0.01 vs. TNBS.
Disease activity index .
| Group |
| D2-1 | D3-2 | D4-3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 10 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0.00 ± 0.00 |
| TNBS group | 9 | 10.33 ± 1.50▲ | 11.33 ± 1.21▲ | 10.01 ± 2.04▲ |
| Mica group | 9 | 6.33 ± 1.36▲■ | 7.5 ± 1.97▲■ | 7.1 ± 2.48▲■ |
|
| 118.226 | 111.460 | 47.532 |
▲ P < 0.01 vs. control; ■P < 0.01 vs. TNBS.
Figure 2Histological analysis (HE staining) of the colon damage in different groups, ×200.
Macroscopic and histological damage score .
| Group |
| Macroscopic damage score | Histological damage score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 10 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 1.33 ± 1.03 |
| TNBS group | 9 | 4.00 ± 0.89▲ | 8.17 ± 2.99▲ |
| Mica group | 9 | 2.00 ± 1.54▲■ | 3.83 ± 1.47▲■ |
|
| 22.50 | 17.64 |
▲ P < 0.01 vs. control; ■P < 0.01 vs. TNBS.
Figure 3The expression of Ang II, ACE2, Ang (1-7), and IL-10 in different groups, ×200.
The expression of Ang II, ACE2, Ang (1-7), and IL-10 in colon tissue.
| Group |
| Ang II | ACE2 | Ang (1-7) | IL-10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control group | 10 | 2.16 ± 0.41 | 2.04 ± 0.29 | 0.13 ± 0.14 | 2.71 ± 0.78 |
| TNBS group | 9 | 4.83 ± 2.11▲ | 3.50 ± 0.55▲ | 1.04 ± 0.56▲ | 4.88 ± 0.83▲ |
| Mica group | 9 | 2.33 ± 0.52▲■ | 5.13 ± 1.84▲■ | 2.00 ± 0.60▲■ | 9.04 ± 2.62▲■ |
|
| 11.33 | 8.19 | 21.7 | 22.71 |
▲ P < 0.05 vs. control; ■P < 0.05 vs. TNBS.
The level of IL-17A in colon tissue .
| Group |
| IL-17A |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | 10 | 0.65 ± 0.03 |
| TNBS group | 9 | 6.93 ± 0.44▲ |
| Mica group | 9 | 2.63 ± 0.64▲■ |
|
| 26.39 |
▲ P < 0.01 vs. control; ■P < 0.01 vs. TNBS.