期刊文献+

功能性消化不良患者十二指肠免疫细胞的变化 被引量:6

Quantity alterations of duodenal immune cells in patients with functional dyspepsia
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨十二指肠黏膜嗜酸粒细胞、肥大细胞、上皮间淋巴细胞(IELs)在功能性消化不良(FD)患者中的变化。方法选择2011年5-6月泰安市中心医院收治的48例FD患者和21例健康志愿者进行回顾性研究,胃镜钳取十二指肠球部及降段黏膜组织,HE染色并计数黏膜嗜酸粒细胞及上皮间淋巴细胞,主要碱性蛋白免疫组化染色评判嗜酸粒细胞脱颗粒程度,甲苯胺蓝染色计数肥大细胞总数及脱颗粒的肥大细胞数。结果 FD及其两种亚型餐后不适综合征(PDS)及上腹痛综合征(EPS)患者中十二指肠降段黏膜嗜酸粒细胞数显著高于对照组(23.23±5.18 vs.19.48±5.06,22.65±5.81 vs.19.48±5.06,23.76±4.58 vs.19.48±5.06,P均<0.05);十二指肠降段黏膜嗜酸粒细胞脱颗粒比例显著高于对照组(26/48 vs.3/21,12/23 vs.3/21,14/25 vs.3/21,P均<0.05);十二指肠球部黏膜肥大细胞数显著高于对照组(120.94±13.31 vs.104.29±20.81,121.00±13.75 vs.104.29±20.81,120.88±13.13 vs.104.29±20.81,P均<0.05);十二指肠降段黏膜肥大细胞数显著高于对照组(123.28±13.40 vs.108.62±7.64,124.32±16.53 vs.104.29±20.81,122.24±9.54 vs.104.29±20.81,P均<0.05);十二指肠球部黏膜脱颗粒肥大细胞数显著高于对照组(60.23±5.10 vs.25.38±2.32,59.84±4.50 vs 25.38±2.32,60.58±5.66 vs.25.38±2.32,P均<0.05);十二指肠降段黏膜脱颗粒肥大细胞数显著高于对照组(66.97±5.30 vs.30.66±2.89,66.63±5.37 vs.30.66±2.89,67.28±5.32 vs.30.66±2.89,P均<0.05)。结论十二指肠降段黏膜嗜酸粒细胞、十二指肠球部及降段黏膜肥大细胞可能参与了FD的发病。 Objective To investigate the alterations of duodenal eosinophils and mast cells and intraepithelial lymphocytes(IELs)in patients with functional dyspepsia(FD).Methods Fifty patients with FD and twenty-one healthy volunteers were selected from May 2011 to June 2011 in Taian City Central Hospital.All subjects underwent upper endoscopy and biopsy, eosinophils and IELs of the bulb ( D1 ) and second part ( D2 ) of duodenum were identified and counted by HE staining, major basic protein ( MBP ) immunostaining for eosinophil degranulation in D2, toluidine blue staining for mast cells and mast cells degranulation.Results Compared to controls, eosinophils were significantly increased in FD and postprandial distress syndrome(PDS)and epigastric pain syndrome(EPS)in D2(23.23 ±5.18 vs.19.48 ± 5.06,22.65 ±5.81 vs.19.48 ±5.06,23.76 ±4.58 vs.19.48 ±5.06;all P〈0.05).Eosinophil degranulation rates were significantly increased in FD,PDS and EPS in D2(26/48 vs.3/21,12/23 vs.3/21,14/25 vs.3/21;all P〈0.05).Mast cells were significantly increased in FD,PDS and EPS in D1(120.94 ±13.31 vs. 104.29 ±20.81,121.00 ±13.75 vs.104.29 ±20.81,120.88 ±13.13 vs.104.29 ±20.81;all P〈0.05)and D2(123.28 ±13.40 vs.108.62 ±7.64,124.32 ±16.53 vs.104.29 ±20.81,122.24 ±9.54 vs.104.29 ± 20.81;all P 〈0.05 ) .Mast cells degranulations were significantly increased in FD, PDS and EPS in D1 (60.23 ±5.10 vs.25.38 ±2.32,59.84 ±4.50 vs.25.38 ±2.32,60.58 ±5.66 vs.±25.38 ±2.32;P〈0.05)and D2(66.97 ±5.30 vs.30.66 ±2.89,66.63 ±5.37 vs.30.66 ±2.89,67.28 ±5.32 vs.30.66 ± 2.89;P〈0.05 ) .Conclusions Eosinophils in D2 and mast cells in D1 and D2 may be involved in the pathogenesis of FD.
出处 《中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版)》 2016年第5期210-214,共5页 Chinese Journal of Digestion and Medical Imageology(Electronic Edition)
关键词 消化不良 十二指肠 免疫 嗜酸性粒细胞 肥大细胞 脱颗粒 Dyspepsia Duodenum Immune Eosinophils Mast cells Degranulation
  • 相关文献

参考文献16

  • 1Mearin F, Perez--Oliveras M, Perello A, et al. Dyspepsiaand irritable bowel syndrome after a Salmonellagastroenteritis outbreak : one-year follow-up cohort study[J]. Gastroenterology, 2005,129(1) : 98 -104.
  • 2Walker MM, Warwick A, Ung C, et al. The role ofeosinophils and mast cells in intestinal functional disease[J]. Curr Gastroenterol Rep, 2011,13(4) :323-330.
  • 3Kindt S, Tertychnyy A, de Hertogh G, et al. Intestinalimmune activation in presumed post-infectious functionaldyspepsia [J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil,2009, 21 ( 8 ) :832-856.
  • 4Drossman DA. The functional gastrointestinal disorders andthe Rome IH process [J] . Gastroenterology, 2006,130 ( 5 ) :1377-1390.
  • 5朱良如,钱伟,侯晓华.功能性消化不良患者肠嗜铬细胞数量及功能改变[J].中华消化杂志,2006,26(9):583-585. 被引量:27
  • 6Tslley N,Walker M,Aro P ,et al. Non-ulcer Dyspepsia andDuodenal Eosinophilia : An Adult Endoscopic Population-Based Case-Control Study[J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol,2007,5(10) :1175-1183.
  • 7王承党,郭朝书.肥大细胞和类胰蛋白酶在腹泻型肠易激综合征升结肠黏膜中的表达及意义[J].世界华人消化杂志,2010,18(16):1682-1686. 被引量:20
  • 8Powell N, Walker MM, Talley NJ. Gastrointestinaleosinophils in health, disease and functional disorders [J].Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol,2010,7 (3) : 146-156.
  • 9Murch SH. Allergy and intestinal dysmotility-evidence ofgenuine causal linkage- [J] . Curr Opin Gastroenterol,2006,22(6) :664-668.
  • 10Hogan SP, Mishra A, Brandt EB, et al. A pathologicalfunction for eotaxin and eosinophils in eosinophilicgastrointestinal inflammation[J]. Nat Immunol,2001,2(4) :353-360.

二级参考文献37

  • 1李延青,张海燕,左秀丽,袁海鹏,卢雪峰,李君曼.肠易激综合征患者肠黏膜Th1/Th2漂移的研究[J].中华消化杂志,2004,24(12):728-731. 被引量:74
  • 2朱良如,谢小平,钱伟,侯晓华.5-羟色胺在胃机械感觉过敏中的作用[J].中华消化杂志,2005,25(3):166-168. 被引量:29
  • 3Iris Posserud,Amanda Ersryd,Magnus Simrén.Functional findings in irritable bowel syndrome[J].World Journal of Gastroenterology,2006,12(18):2830-2838. 被引量:9
  • 4鞠辉,张小芳,刘希双,魏良洲.感染后与非感染后IBS患者结肠黏膜SP与IL-2、IFN-γ表达的相关性[J].世界华人消化杂志,2006,14(32):3116-3120. 被引量:7
  • 5Drossman AD.The functional gastrointestinal disorders:diagnosis,pathophysiology,and treatment:a multinational consensus.2nd ed.Lawrence:Allen Press,2000.
  • 6Gershon MD.Review article:serotonin receptors and transporters-roles in normal and abnormal gastrointestinal motility.Aliment Pharmacol Ther,2004,20(suppl 7):3-14.
  • 7Dunlop SP,Jenkins D,Neal KR,et al.Relative importance of enterochromaffin cell hyperplasia,anxiety,and depression in postinfections IBS.Gastroenterology,2003,125:1651-1659.
  • 8Crowell MD,Shetzline MA,Moses PL,et al.Enterochromaf fin cells and 5-HT signaling in the pathophysiology of disorders of gastrointestinal function.Curr Opin Investig Drugs,2004,5:55-60.
  • 9Rantala I,Paronen I,Kainulainen H,et al.Enterochromaffin cell density in the gastric mucosa of patients with chronic renal failure.APMIS,1996,104:362-366.
  • 10Yu PL,Fujimura M,Hayashi N,et al.Mechanism in regulating the release of serotonin from the perfused rat stomach.Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol,2001,280:G1099-G1105.

共引文献84

同被引文献58

引证文献6

二级引证文献46

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部