| Literature DB >> 34873140 |
Lei Cao1, Fen Ping2, Fengrui Zhang2, Haixiang Gao3, Ping Li2, Xiaohui Ning2, Guohuan Cui2, Zheng Ma4, Xin Jiang5, Suyan Li6, Shuzhi Han2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is the air pollutant that most threatens global public health. The purpose of this study was to observe the inflammatory and oxidative stress injury of multiple organs induced by PM2.5 in rats and to explore the tissue-protective effect of erdosteine. MATERIAL AND METHODS We randomly divided 40 male Wistar rats into a blank control group, a saline group, a PM2.5 exposure group, and an erdosteine intervention group. We assessed changes in organs tissue homogenate and biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress in serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF). RESULTS (1) The expressions of IL-6, IL-1ß, TNF-alpha, 8-OHdG, 4-HNE, and PCC in serum and BALF of the PM2.5 exposure group increased, but decreased after treatment with erdosteine, suggesting that erdosteine treatment attenuates inflammatory and oxidative stress injury. (2) The expression of γ-GCS in serum and lungs in the PM2.5 exposure group increased, but did not change significantly after treatment with erdosteine. This suggests that PM2.5 upregulates the level of γ-GCS, while erdosteine does not affect this protective response. (3) The expression of T-AOC in serum, lungs, spleens, and kidneys of the PM2.5 exposure group decreased, but increased after treatment with erdosteine. Our results suggest that PM2.5 can cause imbalance of oxidation/anti-oxidation in multiple organs, and erdosteine can alleviate this imbalance. CONCLUSIONS PM2.5 exposure can lead to inflammatory and oxidative stress damage in serum and organ tissues of rats. Erdosteine may be an effective anti-inflammatory and antioxidant that can reduce this injury.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34873140 PMCID: PMC8665604 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.930909
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1The pathological sections of rat lung tissues under light microscopic in each group (HE staining, 200×): the blank control group (A), the saline group (B), the PM2.5 exposure group (C), the erdosteine intervention group (D) (Adobe Illustrator CC 2019, Adobe Systems Incorporated).
Comparisons of cytokine level in rat serum of each group (n=10).
| Group | IL-6 (pg/ml) | IL-1β (pg/ml) | TNF-α (pg/ml) | 8-OHdG (ng/ml) | 4-HNE (ug/ml) | PCC (nmol/mg·prot) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank control group | 4.725±1.628a | 15.605±3.673a | 3.797±1.337a | 1.238±0.130a | 5.359±1.031a | 5.679±1.012a |
| Saline group | 4.980±1.690a | 16.282±3.291a | 2.774±0.923a | 1.190±0.127a | 5.767±1.180a | 5.990±1.402a |
| PM2.5 exposure group | 10.978±2.572b | 29.650±5.611b | 14.513±4.451b | 2.457±0.296b | 8.845±1.695b | 25.782±2.644b |
| Erdosteine intervention group | 7.562±1.989c | 24.133±4.911c | 6.619±1.491c | 1.669±0.236c | 7.416±1.650c | 16.137±2.43c |
| F | 21.053 | 22.574 | 45.758 | 18.277 | 13.420 | 231.090 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
In the above table, equal letters indicate no statistical differences, P>0.05; different letters indicate statistical differences, P<0.05 (Microsoft Office 2010, Microsoft Corporation).
Comparisons of cytokine level in rat BALF of each group (n=10).
| Group | IL-6 (pg/ml) | IL-1β (pg/ml) | TNF-α (pg/ml) | 8-OHdG (ng/ml) | 4-HNE (ug/ml) | PCC (nmol/mg·prot) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank control group | 7.547±1.59a | 26.981±7.051a | 5.79±1.01a | 1.299±0.118a | 5.742±1.169a | 12.084±3.034a |
| Saline group | 7.442±1.777a | 25.938±7.114a | 4.42±1.185a | 1.381±0.23a | 6.251±1.254a | 13.974±2.285a |
| PM2.5 exposure group | 13.167±2.413b | 54.497±9.317b | 23.773±4.881b | 2.657±0.387b | 9.747±1.555b | 34.387±4.33b |
| Erdosteine intervention group | 10.041±1.835c | 45.718±4.594c | 9.169±1.49c | 1.709±0.23c | 7.071±1.159c | 18.205±3.833c |
| F | 19.515 | 38.309 | 110.883 | 57.624 | 32.156 | 85.985 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
In the above table, equal letters indicate no statistical differences, P>0.05; different letters indicate statistical differences, P<0.05 (Microsoft Office 2010, Microsoft Corporation).
Comparisons of γ-GCS (U/mg·prot) level in rat organs of each group (n=10).
| Group | Serum | Lung | Heart | Liver | Kidney | Spleen |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank control group | 5.265±1.575a | 6.362±1.698a | 6.081±1.051a | 5.790±1.012a | 2.299±0.518a | 5.742±1.169a |
| Saline group | 5.659±1.757a | 6.287±1.702a | 5.568±1.114a | 4.420±1.185a | 2.381±0.423a | 6.251±1.254a |
| PM2.5 exposure group | 9.171±1.763b | 10.258±2.236b | 4.775±1.317a | 4.773±1.881a | 2.657±0.387a | 6.747±1.555a |
| Erdosteine intervention group | 10.369±1.835b | 9.541±1.258b | 5.718±1.594a | 5.169±1.490a | 2.709±0.523a | 7.071±1.159a |
| F | 21.431 | 14.056 | 1.832 | 1.690 | 1.884 | 2.019 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.159 | 0.187 | 0.150 | 0.129 |
In the above table, equal letters indicate no statistical differences, P>0.05; different letters indicate statistical differences, P<0.05 (Microsoft Office 2010, Microsoft Corporation).
Comparisons of T-AOC (U/mg·prot) level in rat organs of each group (n=10).
| Group | Serum | Lung | Heart | Liver | Kidney | Spleen |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blank control group | 17.246±2.157a | 18.364±2.391a | 14.847±2.030a | 15.797±1.012a | 11.248±1.139a | 15.647±1.174a |
| Saline group | 17.256±3.754a | 19.084±2.046a | 15.926±2.121a | 14.821±1.147a | 11.326±1.187a | 16.261±1.320a |
| PM2.5 exposure group | 8.163±2.035b | 7.434±2.127b | 13.484±3.206a | 9.765±1.216b | 4.528±1.309b | 5.801±1.473b |
| Erdosteine intervention group | 12.084±1.74c | 10.206±2.564c | 12.979±3.308a | 8.847±1.496b | 8.615±1.233c | 7.084±1.158c |
| F | 30.073 | 64.882 | 1.872 | 83.310 | 68.749 | 183.935 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.153 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
In the above table, equal letters indicate no statistical differences, P>0.05; different letters indicate statistical differences, P<0.05 (Microsoft Office 2010, Microsoft Corporation).