ArticleJournal of inflammation (London, England)2017
Host responses to concurrent combined injuries in non-human primates.
Article in Journal of inflammation (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development, refinement, and characterization of a nonhuman primate critical care environment.PloS one · 2023Article
- Impact of epidural analgesia on the systemic biomarker response after hepatic resection.Oncotarget · 2019Article
- Enrichment-triggered prodrug activation demonstrated through mitochondria-targeted delivery of doxorubicin and carbon monoxide.Nature chemistry · 2018Article
- The impact of septic stimuli on the systemic inflammatory response and physiologic insult in a preclinical non-human primate model of polytraumatic injury.Journal of inflammation (London, England) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMulti-organ failure (MOF) following trauma remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality related to a poorly understood abnormal inflammatory response. We characterized the inflammatory response in a non-human primate soft tissue injury and closed abdomen hemorrhage and sepsis model developed to assess realistic injury patterns and induce MOF.
methodsAdult male Mauritan Cynomolgus Macaques underwent laparoscopy to create a cecal perforation and non-anatomic liver resection along with a full-thickness flank soft tissue injury. Treatment consisted of a pre-hospital phase followed by a hospital phase after 120 minutes. Blood counts, chemistries, and cytokines/chemokines were measured throughout the study. Lung tissue inflammation/apoptosis was confirmed by mRNA quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR), H&E, myeloperoxidase (MPO) and TUNEL staining was performed comparing age-matched uninjured controls to experimental animals.
resultsTwenty-one animals underwent the protocol. Mean percent hepatectomy was 64.4 ± 5.6; percent blood loss was 69.0 ± 12.1. Clinical evidence of end-organ damage was reflected by a significant elevation in creatinine (1.1 ± 0.03 vs. 1.9 ± 0.4, p=0.026). Significant increases in systemic levels of IL-10, IL-1ra, IL-6, G-CSF, and MCP-1 occurred (11-2986-fold) by 240 minutes. Excessive pulmonary inflammation was evidenced by alveolar edema, congestion, and wall thickening (H&E staining). Concordantly, amplified accumulation of MPO leukocytes and significant pulmonary inflammation and pneumocyte apoptosis (TUNEL) was confirmed using qRT-PCR.
conclusionWe created a clinically relevant large animal multi-trauma model using laparoscopy that resulted in a significant systemic inflammatory response and MOF. With this model, we anticipate studying systemic inflammation and testing innovative therapeutic options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.