摘要
目的观察乌司他丁联合维拉帕米在大鼠急性肺缺血再灌注损伤中的保护作刚。方法建立大鼠急性肺缺血再灌注损伤模型，分为对照组、乌司他丁预处理组、维拉帕米预处理组和 联合预处理组，再灌注后4h处死大鼠，分别进行肺组织湿干重比（W／D）测定，肺组织丙二醛（MDA）、一氧化氮（NO）含量和髓过氧化物酶（MPO）、超氧化物歧化酶（SOD）活性测定以及肺组织病理学观察。结果再灌注4h后，联合预处理组肺组织W／D比值为4．78±0．49，显著低于对照组（7．05±0．74，t=5．904，P〈0．01），也显著低于乌司他丁预处理组（6．16±0．62，t=2．387，P〈0．05）和维拉帕米预处理组（5．91±0．47，t=2．176，P〈0．05）；联合预处理组肺组织MDA含量为（1．34±0．10）nmol／mg蛋白，显著低于对照组[（2．08±0．15）nmol／mg蛋白，t=6．324，P〈0．01]，也低于乌司他丁预处理组[（1．83±0．11）nmol／mg蛋白，t=2．692，P〈0．05]和维拉帕米预处理组[（1．76±0．17）nmol／mg蛋白，t=3．008，P〈0．05]；联合组NO含量为（0．71±0．16）μmol／L，显著高于对照组[（0．43±0．12）μmol／L，t=6．168，P〈0．01]，也显著高于乌司他丁预处理组[（0．57±0．14）μmol／L，t=3．637，P〈0．05]和维拉帕米预处理组[（0．60±0．17）μmol／L，t=3．243，P〈0．05]；联合组MPO活性为（0．72±0．05）U／g，显著低于对照组[（1．03±0．09）U／g，t=5．210，P〈0．01]，也低于乌司他丁预处理组[（0．84±0．07）U／g，t=2．315，P〈0．05]和维拉帕米预处理组[（0．86±0．10）U／g，t=2．306，P〈0．05]；联合组SOD活性为（51．66±3．97）U／mg蛋白，显著高于对照组[（30．19±3．69）U／mg蛋白，t=5．731，P〈0．01]，也显著高于乌司他丁预处理组[（42．07±4．24）U／mg蛋白，t=3．134，P〈0．05]和维拉帕米预处理组[（43．12±4．88）U／mg蛋白，t=3．043，P〈0．05]；联合组组织病理学评分为（2．9±1．8）分，与对照组（8．6±3．5）比较差异有统计学意义（t=7．308，P〈0．01），与乌司他丁（5．2±2．7）或维拉帕米（5．4±2．8）处理组比较差异有统计学意义（t=1．927，P〈0．05；t=2．113，P〈0．05）。结论乌司他丁与维拉帕米联用可以明显减轻肺脏缺血再灌注损伤，效果优于单用乌司他丁或维拉帕米。
Objective To investigate the protective role of ulinastatin combined with verapamll m rat acute lung ischemia reperfusion injury （ALIRI）. Methods Rat ALIRI models were established and randomly divided into 4 groups： control group, ulinastatin pretreatment group, verapamil pretreatment group, and ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group. The dry weight （W/D） ratio, the content of lung tissue malondialdehyde （MDA） and nitric oxide （NO） , the activity of myeloperoxidase （MPO） and superoxide dismutase （SOD） and lung tissue morphological changes were measured 4 h after reperfusion. Results 4 h after reperfusion, W/D ratio in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group was （4. 78 ± 0. 49）, signifi- cantly lower than in control group （ 7.05 ± 0. 74, t = 5. 904, P 〈 0. 01 ） , also significantly lower than in ulinastatin pretreatment group （ 6. 16 ± 0. 62, t = 2. 387, P 〈 0.05 ） and verapamil pretreatment group （ 5.91 ± 0. 47,t = 2. 176, P 〈 0. 05 ）. MDA content in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group was （ 1.34 ± 0. 10） nmol/mg protein, significantly lower than in control group [ （ 2.08 ± 0. 15 ） nmol/mg protein, t = 6.324 ,P 〈0. 01 ], also significantly lower than in ulinastatin pretreatment group [ （ 1.83 ± 0. 11 ） nmol/mg protein, t = 2. 692, P 〈 0. 05 ] and verapamil pretreatment group [ （ 1.76 ± 0. 17 ） nmol/mg protein, t = 3.008,P 〈0. 05）. NO content in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group was （0. 71 ± 0. 16） μmol/L, signifi- cantly higher than in control group [ （0. 43 ±0. 12） μmol/L,t =6. 168,P 〈0. 01 ], also significantly higher than in ulinastatin pretreatment group [ （0. 57 ±0. 14）μmol/L, t = 3. 637 ,P 〈 0. 05 ] and verapamil pretreatment group [ （0. 60± 0. 17） μmol/L, t = 3. 243, P 〈 0. 05 ]. MPO activity in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreat- ment group was （0. 72± 0. 05 ） U/g, significantly lower than in control group [ （ 1.03 ± 0. 09 ） U/g, t = 5. 210,P 〈0. 011, also significantly lower than in ulinastatin pretreatment group [ （0. 84 ±0. 07） U/g,t = 2. 315 ,P 〈0. 05] and verapamil pretreatment group [ （0. 86 ±13. 10） UIg,t =2. 306,P 〈0. 05]. SOD activity in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group was （51.66 ± 3.97） U/mg protein, significantly higher than in control group [ （30. 19 ±3. 69） U/rag protein,t =5.731 ,P 〈0. 01 ], also significantly higher than in ulinastatin pretreatment group [ （42. 07 ±4. 24） U/rag protein,t =3. 134,P 〈0. 05] and verapamil pretreatment group [ （43. 12 ±4. 88） U/rag protein,t =3.043,P 〈0. 05]. Histopathologic score of the lung tissue in ulinastatin ＋ verapamil pretreatment group was （2.9 ±1.8 ）, significantly lower than in control group （ 8.6 ± 3.5,t = 7. 308,P 〈 0. 01 ）, also significantly lower than in ulinastatin pretreatment group （5.2 ± 2. 7, t = 1. 927 ,P 〈0. 05） and verapamil pretreatment group （5.4 ±2. 8 ,t = 2. 113,P 〈0. 05）. Conclusion Ulinastatin combined with verapamil can significantly reduce the lung ischemia-reperfusion injury, and the effect is better than ulinastatin or verapamil used alone.
出处
《中华实验外科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2014年第5期1054-1056,共3页
Chinese Journal of Experimental Surgery
