Display options
Share it on

Iran J Basic Med Sci. 2018 Oct;21(10):1073-1078. doi: 10.22038/IJBMS.2018.27798.6773.

Effects of lipopolysaccharide-induced septic shock on rat isolated kidney, possible role of nitric oxide and protein kinase C pathways.

Iranian journal of basic medical sciences

Zahra Gholamnezhad, Zahra Fatehi Hassanabad

Affiliations

  1. Neurogenic Inflammation Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  2. Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
  3. Emam zaman Hospital, Mashhad, Iran.

PMID: 30524682 PMCID: PMC6281070 DOI: 10.22038/IJBMS.2018.27798.6773

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Pathophysiology of sepsis-associated renal failure (one of the most common cause of death in intensive care units) had not been fully determined. The effect of nitric oxide and protein kinase C (PKC) pathways in isolated kidney of Lipopolysaccharide-treated (LPS) rats were investigated in this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vascular responsiveness to phenylephrine and acetylcholine in the presence and absence of a potent PKC inhibitor (chelerythrine) and nonspecific NO inhibitor (L-NAME) as well as responses to acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside (SNP) were examined.

RESULTS: LPS (10 mg/kg, IP) treatment resulted in a lower systemic pressure and reduction of responses to vasoconstrictor and vasodilator agents (

CONCLUSION: Present study highlighted that five hours of intraperitoneal endotoxin injection is adequate to reduce renal basal perfusion pressure. These results also suggest that PKC inhibition may have a beneficial role in vascular hyporesponsiveness induced by LPS. Although our study partly elaborated on the effects of LPS on isolated renal vascular responses to vasoactive agents, further studies are required to explain how LPS exerts its renal vascular effects.

Keywords: Kidney; Lipopolysaccharide; Nitric oxide; Protein kinase C; Rat; Vasoconstrictor; Vasodilator

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest in this study.

References

  1. N Engl J Med. 1993 May 20;328(20):1471-7 - PubMed
  2. Shock. 2014 Jan;41(1):3-11 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Pharmacol. 2003 Nov 28;481(2-3):153-8 - PubMed
  4. Kidney Int. 2000 Jun;57(6):2502-10 - PubMed
  5. Contrib Nephrol. 2010;167:14-24 - PubMed
  6. J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2006;9(1):119-23 - PubMed
  7. Scand J Infect Dis. 2003;35(9):535-44 - PubMed
  8. Br J Pharmacol. 2002 Dec;137(7):1116-24 - PubMed
  9. J Clin Invest. 1997 Jul 15;100(2):439-48 - PubMed
  10. N Engl J Med. 2004 Jul 8;351(2):159-69 - PubMed
  11. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1999 May 5;1411(2-3):437-55 - PubMed
  12. Crit Care. 2013 Feb 04;17(1):204 - PubMed
  13. Shock. 1996 Oct;6(4):274-8 - PubMed
  14. Contrib Nephrol. 2011;174:89-97 - PubMed
  15. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2015 Feb;63(1):41-52 - PubMed
  16. FEBS Lett. 1991 Oct 7;291(1):145-9 - PubMed
  17. J Intensive Care. 2016 Mar 23;4:17 - PubMed
  18. Shock. 2002 Nov;18(5):450-5 - PubMed
  19. Eur J Pharmacol. 2004 Jun 28;494(2-3):199-204 - PubMed
  20. Inflammation. 2012 Feb;35(1):206-13 - PubMed
  21. Circ Shock. 1988 Nov;26(3):331-9 - PubMed
  22. Kidney Int. 2006 Jun;69(11):1996-2002 - PubMed

Publication Types