• Zhonghua yi xue za zhi · Mar 2009

    [Protective effects of micro-encapsulated Bifidobacteria on gut barrier after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation: experiment with rats].

    • Xiang-cai Ruan, Shen-ming Wang, Han-ping Shi, Xiao-xi Li, Feng-geng Xia, and Fei-ping Ming.
    • Department of Vascular Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.
    • Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2009 Mar 10;89(9):625-9.

    ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria on gut barrier and bacterial translocation after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation.MethodsSprague-Dawley rats were divided into 6 groups: PBS+sham shock group fed with PBS for 7 days and then undergoing sham shock, bifidobacteria+sham shock group fed with bifidobacteria (10(9) cfu/d) for 7 days and then undergoing sham shock, micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria+sham shock group, fed with micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria (10(9) cfu/d) for 7 days and then undergoing sham shock, PBS+hemorrhagic shock group fed with PBS for 7 days and then undergoing hemorrhagic shock, bifidobacteria+shock group fed with bifidobacteria for 7 days and then undergoing hemorrhagic shock, and micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria+shock group, fed with micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria for 7 days and then undergoing hemorrhagic shock. Three hours after resuscitation laparotomy was performed, distal cecum was resected to undergo bacteriological analysis of the cecal content, mesenteric lymph nodes (MLNs), a liver lobe, and the middle part of spleen were resected to undergo bacterial culture for bacterial translocation, and the terminal ileum was resected to observe the villous damage.ResultsThere was no significant difference in the amount of blood loss among the 3 hemorrhagic shock groups. The amounts of aerobes in cecum of the bifidobacteria+shock and micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria+shock groups, especially that of the latter group, were significantly lower than that of the PBS+shock group. The amounts of anaerobes and the amounts of bifidobacteria in cecum of the bifidobacteria+shock group and micro-encapsulated bifidobacteria+shock group, especially those of the latter group, were significantly higher than those of the PBS+shock group. No bacterial translocation to liver was observed in all groups. The magnitudes of total aerobes translocation in spleen of the bifidobacteria+shock and encapsulated bifidobacteria+shock groups were significantly lower than that of the PBS+shock group, however, there were not significant differences in the translocation in the MLN of total aerobes ad bifidobacteria among different groups. The percentage of ileal villous damage of the bifidobacteria+shock and encapsulated bifidobacteria+shock groups were significantly lower than that of the PBS+shock group.ConclusionBifidobacteria effectively protects the gut barrier, reduces bacterial translocation from the gut after hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation. And micro-encapsulated Bifidobacteria can enhance those effects further.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…