天津医药 ›› 2022, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (8): 810-816.doi: 10.11958/20212359
王勇1(), 牛伟华2, 卢成志2,Δ(
), 许梦萍2, 徐建强2, 何强2, 许学升1
收稿日期:
2021-10-18
修回日期:
2022-04-25
出版日期:
2022-08-15
发布日期:
2022-08-12
通讯作者:
卢成志
E-mail:610587321@qq.com;lucz8@126.com
作者简介:
王勇(1985),男,主治医师,主要从事冠心病的基础和临床方面研究。E-mail: 基金资助:
WANG Yong1(), NIU Weihua2, LU Chengzhi2,Δ(
), XU Mengping2, XU Jianqiang2, HE Qiang2, XU Xuesheng1
Received:
2021-10-18
Revised:
2022-04-25
Published:
2022-08-15
Online:
2022-08-12
Contact:
LU Chengzhi
E-mail:610587321@qq.com;lucz8@126.com
王勇, 牛伟华, 卢成志, 许梦萍, 徐建强, 何强, 许学升. 去肾交感神经对2型糖尿病大鼠血管内皮细胞自噬及NLRP3活化的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2022, 50(8): 810-816.
WANG Yong, NIU Weihua, LU Chengzhi, XU Mengping, XU Jianqiang, HE Qiang, XU Xuesheng. Effects of renal denervation on the vascular endothelial cell autophagy and NLRP3 activation in type 2 diabetic rats[J]. Tianjin Medical Journal, 2022, 50(8): 810-816.
摘要:
目的 探讨去肾交感神经(RDN)对2型糖尿病(T2DM)大鼠血管内皮细胞自噬及核苷酸结合寡聚化结构域受体蛋白3(NLRP3)炎症小体活化的影响。方法 采用高脂饮食联合小剂量链脲佐菌素(STZ)腹腔注射制备T2DM大鼠模型。采用随机数字表法分为对照组(CON组)、糖尿病对照组(T2DM组)、双侧假手术组(Sham组)、双侧手术组(RDN组),每组6只。分别于基线状态、RDN术前及术后4周测量各项指标的变化。采用离体血管环张力实验评价血管舒张功能,Western blot检测主动脉内皮细胞自噬蛋白Beclin1、微管相关蛋白1轻链3(LC3)、p62、炎症小体NLRP3、胱天蛋白酶1(Caspase-1),白细胞介素(IL)-1β及内皮型一氧化氮合酶(eNOS)蛋白表达水平。结果 与CON组比较,T2DM组大鼠主动脉内皮舒张功能明显降低,自噬蛋白Beclin1、LC3表达降低,p62表达水平升高,且NLRP3、Caspase-1、IL-1β蛋白表达水平升高,eNOS蛋白表达水平降低(P<0.05)。与T2DM组和Sham组相比,RDN组血管内皮舒张功能改善(P<0.05);自噬蛋白Beclin1、LC3表达升高,p62表达水平降低,且NLRP3、Caspase-1、IL-1β蛋白的表达降低,eNOS蛋白表达水平升高(P<0.05)。结论 T2DM大鼠血管内皮功能异常可能与自噬水平降低及NLRP3炎症小体的过度活化有关。RDN可以增强血管内皮细胞自噬水平,抑制NLRP3炎症小体的活化,改善血管内皮功能。
中图分类号:
基因名称 | 引物序列(5'→3') | 产物大小(bp) |
---|---|---|
NLRP3 | 上游:AGTCTTCGAGATTTCCTGGTAG | 114 |
下游:CTTGTGCTCTGCTTGTGAGG | ||
GAPDH | 上游:CCTTCCGTGTTCCTACCC | 130 |
下游:CCCAAGATGCCCTTCAGT |
表1 实时荧光定量PCR引物序列
Tab.1 Primer sequences for PCR analyses
基因名称 | 引物序列(5'→3') | 产物大小(bp) |
---|---|---|
NLRP3 | 上游:AGTCTTCGAGATTTCCTGGTAG | 114 |
下游:CTTGTGCTCTGCTTGTGAGG | ||
GAPDH | 上游:CCTTCCGTGTTCCTACCC | 130 |
下游:CCCAAGATGCCCTTCAGT |
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 100.33±6.97 | 319.17±5.19 | 4.17±0.44 | 16.16±1.95 | 66.87±2.01 | 273.55±14.38 | 71.60±7.29 |
T2DM组 | 98.14±5.24 | 316.29±6.18 | 4.01±0.62 | 15.91±1.42 | 67.48±2.04 | 284.39±12.30 | 74.15±6.69 |
Sham组 | 102.28±4.86 | 314.43±4.43 | 4.31±0.37 | 17.21±1.79 | 66.50±2.27 | 281.41±14.61 | 72.96±5.79 |
RDN组 | 102.70±6.02 | 317.20±8.51 | 3.94±0.43 | 16.24±2.18 | 66.29±1.92 | 280.44±14.49 | 73.94±6.99 |
F | 0.991 | 0.583 | 0.983 | 0.575 | 0.384 | 0.645 | 0.181 |
表2 各组大鼠基线状态指标比较 (n=6, $\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.2 Comparison of baseline parameters between the four groups
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 100.33±6.97 | 319.17±5.19 | 4.17±0.44 | 16.16±1.95 | 66.87±2.01 | 273.55±14.38 | 71.60±7.29 |
T2DM组 | 98.14±5.24 | 316.29±6.18 | 4.01±0.62 | 15.91±1.42 | 67.48±2.04 | 284.39±12.30 | 74.15±6.69 |
Sham组 | 102.28±4.86 | 314.43±4.43 | 4.31±0.37 | 17.21±1.79 | 66.50±2.27 | 281.41±14.61 | 72.96±5.79 |
RDN组 | 102.70±6.02 | 317.20±8.51 | 3.94±0.43 | 16.24±2.18 | 66.29±1.92 | 280.44±14.49 | 73.94±6.99 |
F | 0.991 | 0.583 | 0.983 | 0.575 | 0.384 | 0.645 | 0.181 |
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 105.50±5.39 | 319.50±5.61 | 4.02±0.46 | 17.02±1.86 | 67.69±3.22 | 275.41±16.38 | 71.73±6.16 |
T2DM组 | 136.33±8.78a | 346.17±5.74a | 18.87±2.73a | 35.44±3.87a | 103.10±4.09a | 478.74±20.21a | 38.92±4.90a |
Sham组 | 135.50±5.99a | 348.83±7.31a | 19.45±2.60a | 33.61±3.33a | 105.01±3.73a | 491.75±18.51a | 37.56±4.18a |
RDN组 | 136.67±6.41a | 347.50±8.09a | 19.50±2.49a | 35.17±3.38a | 102.03±4.05a | 488.07±21.63a | 36.76±4.99a |
F | 29.751** | 25.813** | 67.700** | 46.338** | 133.809** | 179.718** | 66.513** |
表3 RDN术前各组大鼠指标比较 (n=6,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.3 Comparison of parameters before RDN between the four groups
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 105.50±5.39 | 319.50±5.61 | 4.02±0.46 | 17.02±1.86 | 67.69±3.22 | 275.41±16.38 | 71.73±6.16 |
T2DM组 | 136.33±8.78a | 346.17±5.74a | 18.87±2.73a | 35.44±3.87a | 103.10±4.09a | 478.74±20.21a | 38.92±4.90a |
Sham组 | 135.50±5.99a | 348.83±7.31a | 19.45±2.60a | 33.61±3.33a | 105.01±3.73a | 491.75±18.51a | 37.56±4.18a |
RDN组 | 136.67±6.41a | 347.50±8.09a | 19.50±2.49a | 35.17±3.38a | 102.03±4.05a | 488.07±21.63a | 36.76±4.99a |
F | 29.751** | 25.813** | 67.700** | 46.338** | 133.809** | 179.718** | 66.513** |
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) | 肾脏NE(ng/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 102.16±7.83 | 320.16±9.82 | 3.92±0.36 | 16.41±1.99 | 68.39±3.13 | 273.78±16.84 | 71.07±6.15 | 91.52±3.23 |
T2DM组 | 138.67±4.46a | 349.67±6.12a | 18.98±2.07a | 35.05±3.96a | 101.59±4.01a | 477.64±21.96a | 38.23±3.68a | 149.07±4.73a |
Sham组 | 137.33±5.92a | 347.00±9.59a | 19.98±2.39a | 34.76±4.53a | 103.92±3.46a | 484.48±16.49a | 37.79±2.97a | 151.91±5.13a |
RDN组 | 126.33±6.77abc | 328.67±7.06abc | 14.03±1.67abc | 25.40±3.07abc | 89.91±3.26abc | 380.00±21.83abc | 56.15±4.86abc | 126.88±1.38abc |
F | 42.276** | 17.736** | 102.640** | 38.093** | 341.806** | 155.961** | 73.097** | 215.628** |
表4 RDN术后4周各组大鼠指标比较 (n=6,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.4 Comparison of parameters after RDN between the four groups
组别 | SBP(mmHg) | HR(次/min) | FPG(mmol/L) | FINS(IU/L) | NE(ng/L) | vWF(μg/L) | NO(μmol/L) | 肾脏NE(ng/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 102.16±7.83 | 320.16±9.82 | 3.92±0.36 | 16.41±1.99 | 68.39±3.13 | 273.78±16.84 | 71.07±6.15 | 91.52±3.23 |
T2DM组 | 138.67±4.46a | 349.67±6.12a | 18.98±2.07a | 35.05±3.96a | 101.59±4.01a | 477.64±21.96a | 38.23±3.68a | 149.07±4.73a |
Sham组 | 137.33±5.92a | 347.00±9.59a | 19.98±2.39a | 34.76±4.53a | 103.92±3.46a | 484.48±16.49a | 37.79±2.97a | 151.91±5.13a |
RDN组 | 126.33±6.77abc | 328.67±7.06abc | 14.03±1.67abc | 25.40±3.07abc | 89.91±3.26abc | 380.00±21.83abc | 56.15±4.86abc | 126.88±1.38abc |
F | 42.276** | 17.736** | 102.640** | 38.093** | 341.806** | 155.961** | 73.097** | 215.628** |
图1 正常肾动脉与RDN后肾动脉周围神经组织染色比较(HE染色,×400) A~C:正常肾动脉周围神经组织,红色箭头所示为血管外膜结构完整,可见大量的神经纤维;D:RDN组肾动脉周围组织,黑色箭头所示为缺失的血管外膜,结构不完整,未见明显的神经纤维。
Fig.1 Comparison of histological characteristics between chemical ablated renal nerves and normal renal nerves (HE staining, ×400)
图2 RDN术后4周肾动脉TH表达(免疫组化染色,×400) A:CON组;B:T2DM 组;C:Sham组;D:RDN组。
Fig.2 The expression of tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) staining in the renal artery at the end of 4 weeks after RND (Immunohistochemical staining, ×400)
图3 透视电子显微镜观察胸主动脉内皮细胞自噬体的变化(×5 000) A、B:CON组,红色箭头所示为自噬溶酶体内可见正在降解的受损的线粒体;C:T2DM组;D:Sham组,蓝色箭头所示为线粒体嵴断裂溶解消失;E、F:RDN组,红色箭头所示为自噬溶酶体,内含残留的细胞器结构,蓝色箭头所示为线粒体嵴排列紊乱,线粒体基质区域部分蛋白降解形成空泡化。
Fig.3 Changes of autophagosome in rat aortic endothelial cells observed by transmission electron microscope (×5 000)
组别 | lg(SNP) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-10 | -9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | |
CON组 | 2.25±0.82 | 8.97±1.19 | 35.26±6.97 | 61.54±7.93 | 81.54±2.20 | 91.68±2.48 |
T2DM组 | 1.63±0.23a | 4.85±1.05a | 10.46±1.75a | 33.64±7.27a | 60.42±8.09a | 82.78±2.99a |
Sham组 | 1.66±0.36a | 4.64±0.81a | 11.03±1.81a | 37.42±7.02a | 63.82±5.74a | 84.74±2.32a |
RDN组 | 2.33±0.60abc | 8.09±1.72abc | 33.73±5.89abc | 55.60±5.72abc | 77.61±4.08abc | 88.46±2.65abc |
F | 2.311 | 15.952** | 42.037** | 18.705** | 17.678** | 12.033** |
表5 RDN术后4周各组间SNP对胸主动脉内皮舒张功能的影响 (n=6,%,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.5 Effects of SNP on the endothelial relaxation function of aorta at the end of 4 weeks after RND in the four groups
组别 | lg(SNP) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-10 | -9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | |
CON组 | 2.25±0.82 | 8.97±1.19 | 35.26±6.97 | 61.54±7.93 | 81.54±2.20 | 91.68±2.48 |
T2DM组 | 1.63±0.23a | 4.85±1.05a | 10.46±1.75a | 33.64±7.27a | 60.42±8.09a | 82.78±2.99a |
Sham组 | 1.66±0.36a | 4.64±0.81a | 11.03±1.81a | 37.42±7.02a | 63.82±5.74a | 84.74±2.32a |
RDN组 | 2.33±0.60abc | 8.09±1.72abc | 33.73±5.89abc | 55.60±5.72abc | 77.61±4.08abc | 88.46±2.65abc |
F | 2.311 | 15.952** | 42.037** | 18.705** | 17.678** | 12.033** |
组别 | lg(Ach) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | -4 | |
CON组 | 1.72±0.94 | 8.87±1.19 | 30.14±5.05 | 47.54±7.06 | 61.54±5.79 | 75.57±4.98 |
T2DM组 | 1.69±0.53a | 2.09±0.48a | 10.61±2.21a | 27.64±4.33a | 36.22±5.67a | 45.98±6.39a |
Sham组 | 1.46±0.49a | 1.40±0.55a | 14.09±2.15a | 31.42±7.12a | 43.82±6.75a | 48.34±5.92a |
RDN组 | 2.33±0.97abc | 6.50±1.35abc | 26.94±4.88abc | 43.82±13.81abc | 59.61±7.97abc | 72.46±5.19abc |
F | 1.137 | 68.918** | 30.948** | 7.191** | 17.264** | 38.033** |
表6 RDN术后4周各组间Ach对胸主动脉内皮舒张功能的影响 (n=6,%,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.6 Effects of SNP on aortic relaxation to acetylcholine (Ach) at the end of 4 weeks after RND in the four groups
组别 | lg(Ach) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-9 | -8 | -7 | -6 | -5 | -4 | |
CON组 | 1.72±0.94 | 8.87±1.19 | 30.14±5.05 | 47.54±7.06 | 61.54±5.79 | 75.57±4.98 |
T2DM组 | 1.69±0.53a | 2.09±0.48a | 10.61±2.21a | 27.64±4.33a | 36.22±5.67a | 45.98±6.39a |
Sham组 | 1.46±0.49a | 1.40±0.55a | 14.09±2.15a | 31.42±7.12a | 43.82±6.75a | 48.34±5.92a |
RDN组 | 2.33±0.97abc | 6.50±1.35abc | 26.94±4.88abc | 43.82±13.81abc | 59.61±7.97abc | 72.46±5.19abc |
F | 1.137 | 68.918** | 30.948** | 7.191** | 17.264** | 38.033** |
组别 | Beclin1 | LC3 | p62 | cleaved Caspase-3 | eNOS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 1.07±0.20 | 1.45±0.37 | 0.27±0.12 | 0.30±0.05 | 1.01±0.13 |
T2DM组 | 0.60±0.09a | 0.68±0.07a | 0.82±0.12a | 1.57±0.44a | 0.59±0.15a |
Sham组 | 0.54±0.06a | 0.55±0.06a | 0.91±0.16a | 1.09±0.21a | 0.60±0.05a |
RDN组 | 0.85±0.11abc | 0.95±0.17abc | 0.56±0.11abc | 0.72±0.22abc | 0.85±0.09abc |
F | 7.366** | 10.776** | 12.212** | 11.874** | 9.000** |
表7 RDN术后4周各组间胸主动脉内皮细胞Beclin1、LC3、p62、cleaved Caspase-3、eNOS蛋白水平比较 (n=6,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.7 Comparison of Beclin1, LC3, p62, cleaved Caspase-3 and eNOS protein levels in the thoracic aorta at the end of 4 weeks after RND between the four groups
组别 | Beclin1 | LC3 | p62 | cleaved Caspase-3 | eNOS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 1.07±0.20 | 1.45±0.37 | 0.27±0.12 | 0.30±0.05 | 1.01±0.13 |
T2DM组 | 0.60±0.09a | 0.68±0.07a | 0.82±0.12a | 1.57±0.44a | 0.59±0.15a |
Sham组 | 0.54±0.06a | 0.55±0.06a | 0.91±0.16a | 1.09±0.21a | 0.60±0.05a |
RDN组 | 0.85±0.11abc | 0.95±0.17abc | 0.56±0.11abc | 0.72±0.22abc | 0.85±0.09abc |
F | 7.366** | 10.776** | 12.212** | 11.874** | 9.000** |
图4 RDN术后4周各组Beclin1、LC3、p62、cleaved Caspase-3、eNOS蛋白表达 1:CON组;2:T2DM组;3:Sham组;4:RDN组。
Fig.4 Beclin1, LC3, p62, cleaved Caspase-3 and eNOS protein levels at the end of 4 weeks after RND
组别 | NLRP3 mRNA | NLRP3 | Caspase-1 | IL-1β |
---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 1.03±0.05 | 0.46±0.04 | 0.49±0.10 | 0.48±0.11 |
T2DM组 | 6.05±0.31a | 1.10±0.12a | 1.06±0.14a | 1.04±0.16a |
Sham组 | 6.01±0.28a | 1.19±0.06a | 1.05±0.14a | 1.02±0.17a |
RDN组 | 3.05±0.29abc | 0.69±0.12abc | 0.83±0.19abc | 0.68±0.09abc |
F | 91.472** | 84.385** | 18.828** | 23.319** |
表8 RDN术后4周各组胸主动脉NLRP3 mRNA、蛋白及炎症蛋白表达水平比较 (n=6,$\bar{x}±s$)
Tab.8 Comparison of expression levels of NLRP3 mRNA and other inflammatory proteins in the thoracic aorta at the end of 4 weeks after RND between the four groups
组别 | NLRP3 mRNA | NLRP3 | Caspase-1 | IL-1β |
---|---|---|---|---|
CON组 | 1.03±0.05 | 0.46±0.04 | 0.49±0.10 | 0.48±0.11 |
T2DM组 | 6.05±0.31a | 1.10±0.12a | 1.06±0.14a | 1.04±0.16a |
Sham组 | 6.01±0.28a | 1.19±0.06a | 1.05±0.14a | 1.02±0.17a |
RDN组 | 3.05±0.29abc | 0.69±0.12abc | 0.83±0.19abc | 0.68±0.09abc |
F | 91.472** | 84.385** | 18.828** | 23.319** |
图5 RDN术后4周胸主动脉内皮细胞NLRP3、Caspase-1、IL-1β蛋白表达 1:CON组;2:T2DM组;3:Sham组;4:RDN组。
Fig.5 NLRP3, Caspase-1 and IL-1β protein levels at the end of 4 weeks after RND
[1] | PREIS S R, HWANG S J, COADY S, et al. Trends in all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality among women and men with and without diabetes mellitus in the Framingham Heart Study,1950 to 2005[J]. Circulation, 2009, 119(13):1728-1735. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.829176. |
[2] | XU S, ILYAS I, LITTLE P J, et al. Endothelial dysfunction in atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases and beyond:from mechanism to pharmacotherapies[J]. Pharmacol Rev, 2021, 73(3):924-967. doi: 10.1124/pharmrev.120.000096. |
[3] | KANDZARI D E, HICKEY G L, POCOCK S J, et al. Prioritised endpoints for device-based hypertension trials:the win ratio methodology[J]. EuroIntervention, 2021, 16(18):e1496-e1502. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-01090. |
[4] | AZIZI M, SCHMIEDER R E, MAHFOUD F, et al. Endovascular ultrasound renal denervation to treat hypertension (RADIANCE-HTN SOLO):A multicentre,international,single-blind,randomised,sham-controlled trial[J]. Lancet, 2018, 391(10137):2335-2345. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31082-1. |
[5] | HOHL M, LINZ D, FRIES P, et al. Modulation of the sympathetic nervous system by renal denervation prevents reduction of aortic distensibility in atherosclerosis prone ApoE-deficient rats[J]. J Transl Med, 2016, 14(1):167. doi: 10.1186/s12967-016-0914-9. |
[6] | ZENG Z, YUAN Q, YU R, et al. Ameliorative effects of probiotic lactobacillus paracasei NL41 on insulin sensitivity,oxidative stress,and beta-cell function in a type 2 diabetes mellitus rat model[J]. Mol Nutr Food Res, 2019, 63(22):e1900457. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.201900457. |
[7] | BANEK C T, GAUTHIER M M, VAN HELDEN D A, et al. Renal inflammation in DOCA-salt hypertension[J]. Hypertension, 2019, 73(5):1079-1086. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.119.12762. |
[8] | SCHLAICH M P, STRAZNICKY N, GRIMA M, et al. Renal denervation: A potential new treatment modality for polycystic ovary syndrome?[J]. J Hypertens, 2011, 29(5):991-996. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328344db3a. |
[9] | HUGGETT R J, SCOTT E M, GILBEY S G, et al. Impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus on sympathetic neural mechanisms in hypertension[J]. Circulation, 2003, 108(25):3097-3101. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000103123.66264.FE. |
[10] | STRAZNICKY N E, GRIMA M T, SARI C I, et al. Neuroadrenergic dysfunction along the diabetes continuum:A comparative study in obese metabolic syndrome subjects[J]. Diabetes, 2012, 61(10):2506-2516. doi: 10.2337/db12-0138. |
[11] | FETTERMAN J L, HOLBROOK M, FLINT N, et al. Restoration of autophagy in endothelial cells from patients with diabetes mellitus improves nitric oxide signaling[J]. Atherosclerosis, 2016, 247:207-217. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2016.01.043. |
[12] | GORA I M, CIECHANOWSKA A, LADYZYNSKI P. NLRP3 Inflammasome at the interface of inflammation,endothelial dysfunction,and type 2 diabetes[J]. Cells, 2021, 10(2):314. doi: 10.3390/cells10020314. |
[13] | 李红霞, 谢晓敏. NLRP3炎性小体在2型糖尿病前期的表达及临床意义的研究[J]. 中国糖尿病杂志, 2019, 27(1):37-41. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6187.2019.01.009. |
LI H X, XIE X M. Expression and clinical value of NLRP3 inflammatory bodies in pre-type 2 diabetes mellitus[J]. Chin J Diabetes, 2019, 27(1):37-41. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-6187.2019.01.009. | |
[14] | LIAN D, YUAN H, YIN X, et al. Puerarin inhibits hyperglycemia-induced inter-endothelial junction through suppressing endothelial Nlrp3 inflammasome activation via ROS-dependent oxidative pathway[J]. Phytomedicine, 2019, 55:310-319. doi: 10.1016/j.phymed.2018.10.013. |
[15] | 许梦萍, 王丽, 卢成志, 等. 去肾交感神经术对犬心肌梗死后左室重构和心肌氧化应激的影响[J]. 中国医师杂志, 2016, 18(12):1801-1804. |
XU M P, WANG L, LU C Z, et al. Effects of renal denervation on left ventricular remodeling and cardiac oxidative stress after myocardial infarction in canine[J]. Journal of Chinese Physician, 2016, 18(12):1801-1804. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1008-1372.2016.12.011. | |
[16] | QIAO L, MA J, ZHANG Z, et al. Deficient chaperone-mediated autophagy promotes inflammation and atherosclerosis[J]. Circ Res, 2021, 129(12):1141-1157. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.121.318908. |
[17] | 王明霞, 蔡雪峰, 林静, 等. 胡黄连苷Ⅱ通过激活自噬作用抑制泡沫细胞的形成与炎症反应[J]. 中国免疫学杂志, 2022, 38(3):313-318. |
WANG M X, CAI X F, LIN J, et al. Picroside Ⅱ alleviates foam cell formation and inflammatory response by activating autophagy[J]. Chinese Journal of Immunology, 2022, 38(3):313-318. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-484X.2022.03.010. | |
[18] | ZHOU H, FENG L, XU F, et al. Berberine inhibits palmitate-induced NLRP3 inflammasome activation by triggering autophagy in macrophages:A new mechanism linking berberine to insulin resistance improvement[J]. Biomed Pharmacother, 2017, 89:864-874. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.03.003. |
[1] | 方杰, 黄芮, 郑红慧, 贾倩倩, 鲍静. miR-9-5p靶向TIMP2诱导多发性骨髓瘤细胞自噬和凋亡的机制[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(8): 785-790. |
[2] | 李大强, 李坚, 陆哲明, 曹阳. 毛蕊异黄酮对脊髓损伤大鼠神经元自噬及凋亡的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(8): 798-803. |
[3] | 李莘, 李雪, 王谙. 温石棉对内皮细胞Wnt5a、p16和p21表达的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(7): 679-682. |
[4] | 杨睿, 魏琼, 孙逸坤, 赵梦竹, 程序, 刘梦华, 张冬梅. 缺氧H9c2来源外泌体对HUVEC增殖、迁移和成管能力的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(7): 714-719. |
[5] | 钟敏, 施震, 周劲松, 李晋杰. GABA信号通路对脓毒症大鼠急性肺损伤内质网应激和线粒体自噬的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(7): 733-737. |
[6] | 王柯, 叶寒露. 隐丹参酮调节HIF-1α/BNIP3信号通路对兔膝骨关节炎模型软骨细胞自噬和凋亡的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(4): 372-378. |
[7] | 何颖, 张广华, 田立东, 于泳浩. 富氢液通过增加自噬治疗大鼠神经病理性疼痛[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(3): 261-265. |
[8] | 汪爱华, 张飞忠, 王红英. 麝香酮调节SHH介导的自噬对卵巢癌细胞恶性进展的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(2): 142-147. |
[9] | 赵元元, 吴小华. 基于PI3K/Akt/mTOR信号通路探讨LINC00173对多囊卵巢综合征颗粒细胞自噬的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(11): 1121-1126. |
[10] | 张贵婷, 何超. oxLDL/β2GPⅠ/aβ2GPⅠ复合物通过TLR4/MyD88/NF-κB途径促进血管内皮细胞血管生成[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(11): 1131-1136. |
[11] | 张睿, 陈思思, 王彤丹, 于珮. KLF4通过促进自噬减轻高糖浓度下巨噬细胞胆固醇沉积[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(10): 1014-1019. |
[12] | 乔娜, 田英, 陈杨, 郝静. LncRNA MALAT1对PCOS颗粒细胞凋亡、自噬和PI3K/Akt/mTOR通路的影响[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(10): 1020-1024. |
[13] | 廖忠, 廖伟健, 赖国利, 文茵, 苏志威, 曾举浩, 丁洪光. 漆黄素抑制小胶质细胞NLRP3炎症小体活化缓解脓毒症后认知功能损害的研究[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(10): 1025-1030. |
[14] | 李繁, 黎仕焕, 谢爽. 血清VCAM-1、PECAM-1水平与MMSE评分联合检测对老年全髋关节置换术患者术后谵妄的预测价值[J]. 天津医药, 2024, 52(10): 1046-1050. |
[15] | 杨渊, 宋爽, 陈容, 刘永莲, 刘春燕. 人参皂苷Rg1拮抗亚砷酸钠诱导C57BL/6小鼠肾毒性研究[J]. 天津医药, 2023, 51(8): 820-824. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||