Stack AM, Saladino RA, Siber GR, Thompson C, Marra MN, Novitsky TJ, Fleisher GR. A comparison of bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant versus recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein for the treatment of Escherichia coli sepsis in rats .
Crit Care Med 1997;
25:101-5. [PMID:
8989184 DOI:
10.1097/00003246-199701000-00020]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To compare a recombinant bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant and a recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein.
DESIGN
Randomized, blinded, controlled study, using a rat model of sepsis.
SETTING
Animal research facility.
SUBJECTS
Male Wistar rats.
INTERVENTIONS
An inoculum of 1.5 x 10(7) to 1.8 x 10(8) Escherichia coli O18ac K1, implanted in the peritoneum, produced bacteremia in 95% of animals after 1 hr. One hour after E. coli challenge, animals received recombinant bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant, recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein, or saline intravenously, followed by ceftriaxone and gentamicin intramuscularly.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-four (85.7%) of 28 animals receiving recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein (p < .001 vs. control) survived 7 days compared with nine (33.3%) of 27 recombinant bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant-treated (p < .001 vs. control) and two (6.5%) of 31 control animals.
CONCLUSIONS
Both recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein and recombinant bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant improved survival. Recombinant endotoxin-neutralizing protein was superior to recombinant bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein variant in its protective effect at the doses tested. Our results suggest that both proteins may be useful in the treatment of human Gram-negative sepsis.
Collapse