失血再灌注胃体部粘膜损伤及丹参提取物F与甲氰咪胍防治作用的比较

Mucosal Injury of Gastric Corpus by Hemorrhage Reperfusion and Comparison between Preventing and Therapeutic Effect of Salvia Extract F and Cimetidine

免费下载全文查看/发表评论下载PDF阅读器

DOI：

中文关键词: 再灌注损伤胃体丹参甲氰咪胍

英文关键词:reperfusion injury gastric corpus Radix Salvia Miltiorrhizae cimetidine

基金项目:国家自然科学基金

作者	单位
姚常柏
张丽红
李和泉

摘要点击次数: 1428

全文下载次数: 1108

中文摘要:

观察失血再灌注胃体部粘膜损伤及丹参提取物Ｆ与甲氰咪胍抗胃粘膜损伤的作用。方法：复制大鼠失血性休克再灌注损伤模型。实验分生理盐水（ＮＳ）组、丹参提取物Ｆ（ＤＳＥＦ）组及甲氰咪胍（ＣＩ）组。结果：（１）ＤＳＥＦ组及ＣＩ组的胃体部粘膜损伤指数及重度损伤均明显低于ＮＳ组（Ｐ＜０．０１），但ＤＳＥＦ组与ＣＩ组间无显著性差鼻（Ｐ＞０．０５）。（２）ＤＳＥＦ组的前列腺素Ｅ２（ＰＧＥ２）、６－酮－前列腺素Ｆ１α／（６－ｋｅＦ－ｔｏ－ＰＧＦ１α）及６－ｋｅｔｏ－ＰＧＦ１α／血栓素Ｂ２（ＴＸＢ２）比值明显高于ＮＳ及ＣＩ组（Ｐ＜０．０１，Ｐ＜０．０５）；而ＴＸＢ２含量明显低于ＮＳ组及ＣＩ组（Ｐ＜０．０５）。但ＣＩ组与ＮＳ组间无显著性差异（Ｐ＞０．０５）。（３）ＤＳＥＦ组及ＣＩ组的细胞内钙含量明显低于ＮＳ组（Ｐ＜０．０１），而ＤＳＥＦ组与ＣＩ组间无显著性差异（Ｐ＞０．０５）。结论：在失血性休克再灌注诱导的大鼠胃体部粘膜损伤中，ＤＳＥＦ与ＣＩ均具有防治作用，但机制不同。ＤＳＥＦ既具有增强胃粘膜保护因子的作用又具有削弱攻击因子的作用，甲氰咪胍只有抵抗攻击因子的作用。

英文摘要:

To observe the mucosal injury of gastric corpus caused by hemorrhage reperfusion and to compare the anti-mucous injure effect between Salvia extract (SE) and cimetidine (CI) on it. Methods: Model of hemorrhagic shock reperfusion injury was produced by itch method. Wistar rats used in this experiment were randomly divided into three groups, the normal saline (NS) group, the SE group and the CI group. Results: (1)As compared with those in the NS control groupl the index and depth of gastric mucosal lesion in the SE group and the CI group decreased significantly (P<0.01), but the difference between the latter two was insignificant (P>0.05). (2) Compared with those in the NS group and the CI group, the levels of PGE2, 6- ketoPGF1α. and 6-keto-PGF1α/TXB2 raised and TXB2 lowered obviously in the SE group, while no significant difference was shown between those in the NS group and the CI group. (3)The intracellular calcium content in the SE group and the CI group was markedly higher than that in the NS group (P<0.01), but there was insignificant difference between the SE and the CI group (P>0.05). Conclusions: Both SE and CI could inhibit the gastric mucosal reperfusion injury, but with different mechanisms. SE could not only enhance the protective factors of gastric mucosa, but also abate the injury factors of it, while CI has the latter only.

关闭