Why the study?
Does CMT-3 prevent acute lung injury in a porcine model of cardiopulmonary bypass and endotoxemia?
Does CMT-3 prevent acute lung injury in a porcine model of cardiopulmonary bypass and endotoxemia?
In a porcine model, the MMP and elastase inhibitor CMT-3 prevented acute lung injury following cardiopulmonary bypass and endotoxemia.
Premature for clinical use in cardiac surgery; extends preclinical data on MMP inhibition in CPB-related lung injury.
BACKGROUND: Acute lung injury (ALI) after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) results from sequential priming and activation of neutrophils. Activated neutrophils release neutral serine, elastase, and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and oxygen radical species, which damage alveolar-capillary basement membranes and the extracellular matrix, resulting in an ALI clinically defined as adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). We hypothesized that treatment with a potent MMP and elastase inhibitor, a chemically modified tetracycline (CMT-3), would prevent ALI in our sequential insult model of ALI after CPB. METHODS AND RESULTS: Anesthetized Yorkshire pigs were randomized to 1 of 5 groups: control (n=3); CPB (n=5), femoral-femoral hypothermic bypass for 1 hour; LPS (n=7), sham bypass followed by infusion of low-dose Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 1 microgram/kg); CPB+LPS (n=6), both insults; and CPB+LPS+CMT-3 (n=5), both insults plus intravenous CMT-3 dosed to obtain a 25-micromol/L blood concentration. CPB+LPS caused severe lung injury, as demonstrated by a significant fall in PaO(2) and an increase in intrapulmonary shunt compared with all groups (P<0.05). These changes were associated with significant pulmonary infiltration of neutrophils and an increase in elastase and MMP-9 activity. CONCLUSIONS: All pathological changes typical of ALI after CPB were prevented by CMT-3. Prevention of lung dysfunction followed an attenuation of both elastase and MMP-2 activity. This study suggests that strategies to combat ARDS should target terminal neutrophil effectors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carney et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: