Limits...
Protection against renal ischaemia/reperfusion injury: A comparative experimental study of the effect of ischaemic preconditioning vs. postconditioning.

Shokeir AA, Hussein AM, Awadalla A, Samy A, Abdelaziz A, Khater S, Barakat N - Arab J Urol (2012)

Bottom Line: However, Ipost caused no significant improvement in renal function.Also, Ipre caused a significant decrease in MDA, and significant increase in GSH and SOD when compared to Ipost.Moreover, Ipre caused a marked and significant reduction in oxidative stress in kidney tissues, while Ipost caused a minimal reduction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Urology and Nephrology Center, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the effect of ischaemic preconditioning (Ipre) vs. ischaemic postconditioning (Ipost) on renal ischaemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury in rats.

Materials and methods: In all, 120 male Sprague-Dawley rats were classified into four groups of 30 rats each, designated sham, control, Ipre and Ipost. Renal function, including serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine clearance (CrCl), fractional Na excretion (FENa) and renal histopathology were measured at 2, 24 and 48 h after ischaemia. Markers of lipid peroxidation (malondialdehyde, MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD) and reduced glutathione (GSH) were measured in kidney tissues during the same intervals.

Results: Ipre caused a significant improvement in renal function, as indicated by a significant decrease in serum creatinine, BUN and FENa, with a significant increase in CrCl. However, Ipost caused no significant improvement in renal function. Morphologically Ipre caused a marked significant improvement in the renal tubular damage score compared to Ipost. Also, Ipre caused a significant decrease in MDA, and significant increase in GSH and SOD when compared to Ipost.

Conclusion: Ipre is more potent than Ipost for improving the renal injury induced by I/R. Ipre caused a marked improvement in renal function and morphology, while Ipost caused a minimal improvement in morphology only. Moreover, Ipre caused a marked and significant reduction in oxidative stress in kidney tissues, while Ipost caused a minimal reduction.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Sections from kidneys of the Ipost group at 24 h (A), showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈70% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400), and in the Ipost group at 48 h (B) showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈60% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400).
© Copyright Policy - CC BY-NC-ND
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4442954&req=5

f0020: Sections from kidneys of the Ipost group at 24 h (A), showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈70% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400), and in the Ipost group at 48 h (B) showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈60% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400).

Mentions: Kidneys from the control rats showed a significant increase in tubular injury score (scores 3, 4) when compared with that of sham rats (P < 0.05; Fig. 1). The kidney sections from the sham group showed the normal preserved kidney structure (Fig. 2A). For the control group, the most severe and pronounced injury was in the cortex and the outer stripe of the outer medulla (OSOM), with a pattern of acute tubular necrosis, which included widespread degeneration of the tubular architecture, detachment of epithelial cells from the basement membrane, tubular cell necrosis, intratubular cast formation and luminal congestion with extensive loss of the brush border (Fig. 2B). Renal sections from the Ipre group showed a marked reduction in the histological features of renal injury (Fig. 3A and B), consisting of mild individual tubular necrosis and minimal tubular dilatation (scores 1, 2, of which 17 rats had score 1 and 13 had score 2) when compared with the control group in the same period (P < 0.05). However, in the Ipost group there were no significant changes (Fig. 4A and B) compared with the control group.


Protection against renal ischaemia/reperfusion injury: A comparative experimental study of the effect of ischaemic preconditioning vs. postconditioning.

Shokeir AA, Hussein AM, Awadalla A, Samy A, Abdelaziz A, Khater S, Barakat N - Arab J Urol (2012)

Sections from kidneys of the Ipost group at 24 h (A), showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈70% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400), and in the Ipost group at 48 h (B) showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈60% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400).
© Copyright Policy - CC BY-NC-ND
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4442954&req=5

f0020: Sections from kidneys of the Ipost group at 24 h (A), showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈70% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400), and in the Ipost group at 48 h (B) showing tubular necrosis at OSOM in ≈60% of tubules, score 4 (H&E ×400).
Mentions: Kidneys from the control rats showed a significant increase in tubular injury score (scores 3, 4) when compared with that of sham rats (P < 0.05; Fig. 1). The kidney sections from the sham group showed the normal preserved kidney structure (Fig. 2A). For the control group, the most severe and pronounced injury was in the cortex and the outer stripe of the outer medulla (OSOM), with a pattern of acute tubular necrosis, which included widespread degeneration of the tubular architecture, detachment of epithelial cells from the basement membrane, tubular cell necrosis, intratubular cast formation and luminal congestion with extensive loss of the brush border (Fig. 2B). Renal sections from the Ipre group showed a marked reduction in the histological features of renal injury (Fig. 3A and B), consisting of mild individual tubular necrosis and minimal tubular dilatation (scores 1, 2, of which 17 rats had score 1 and 13 had score 2) when compared with the control group in the same period (P < 0.05). However, in the Ipost group there were no significant changes (Fig. 4A and B) compared with the control group.

Bottom Line: However, Ipost caused no significant improvement in renal function.Also, Ipre caused a significant decrease in MDA, and significant increase in GSH and SOD when compared to Ipost.Moreover, Ipre caused a marked and significant reduction in oxidative stress in kidney tissues, while Ipost caused a minimal reduction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Urology and Nephrology Center, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the effect of ischaemic preconditioning (Ipre) vs. ischaemic postconditioning (Ipost) on renal ischaemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury in rats.

Materials and methods: In all, 120 male Sprague-Dawley rats were classified into four groups of 30 rats each, designated sham, control, Ipre and Ipost. Renal function, including serum creatinine, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), creatinine clearance (CrCl), fractional Na excretion (FENa) and renal histopathology were measured at 2, 24 and 48 h after ischaemia. Markers of lipid peroxidation (malondialdehyde, MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD) and reduced glutathione (GSH) were measured in kidney tissues during the same intervals.

Results: Ipre caused a significant improvement in renal function, as indicated by a significant decrease in serum creatinine, BUN and FENa, with a significant increase in CrCl. However, Ipost caused no significant improvement in renal function. Morphologically Ipre caused a marked significant improvement in the renal tubular damage score compared to Ipost. Also, Ipre caused a significant decrease in MDA, and significant increase in GSH and SOD when compared to Ipost.

Conclusion: Ipre is more potent than Ipost for improving the renal injury induced by I/R. Ipre caused a marked improvement in renal function and morphology, while Ipost caused a minimal improvement in morphology only. Moreover, Ipre caused a marked and significant reduction in oxidative stress in kidney tissues, while Ipost caused a minimal reduction.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus