论文部分内容阅读
目的 研究哮喘豚鼠气道重塑的机制及气道反应性的变化。方法 实验分二组 :对照组 (2 0只 )和哮喘组 (2 0只 ) ,取双肺与不同刺激因素作用后作组织切片、HE染色 ,通过图像分析仪测定支气管内周长、管壁厚度、外周长 ,并计算平滑肌收缩百分比 (PMS)。结果 (1)哮喘组支气管壁厚度 (WA/Pi)为 (10 0± 2 0 ) μm2 / μm ,支气管壁平滑肌厚度 (平滑肌的面积 /Pi)为 (4 8± 1 5 ) μm2 / μm ,对照组WA/Pi为 (7 9± 2 1) μm2 / μm ,平滑肌的面积 /Pi为 (3 1± 2 0 ) μm2 / μm ,两组比较差异均有显著性(P <0 0 1) ,支气管壁平滑肌细胞核数量 (N/Pi)哮喘组为 (0 0 12 3± 0 0 0 2 7)个 / μm ,对照组为 (0 0 10±0 0 0 3)个 / μm ,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 0 5 )。 (2 )哮喘组气道平滑肌对腺苷的反应性 (以PMS表示 )为 0 34± 0 0 7,对照组为 0 2 9± 0 0 8,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 0 5 ) ,联用氨茶碱和腺苷后 ,哮喘组PMS为 0 2 6± 0 0 7,与单用腺苷组 (0 34± 0 0 7)比较差异有显著性 (P <0 0 1)。 (3)在Ach作用下哮喘组的PMS为 0 2 4± 0 0 4,对照组为 0 19± 0 0 6 ,两组比较差异有显著性 (P <0 0 5 ) ,联用肝素和Ach后 ,哮喘组PMS为 0 2 0± 0 0 4,与单用Ach组
Objective To study the mechanism of airway remodeling and the changes of airway responsiveness in asthmatic guinea pigs. Methods The experiment was divided into two groups: the control group (20 rats) and the asthma group (20 rats). Tissue sections were obtained after the lungs were exposed to different stimulus factors. HE staining was performed. The bronchial perimeter, Thickness, outer circumference, and calculate the percentage of smooth muscle contraction (PMS). Results The bronchial wall thickness (WA / Pi) in asthma group was (100 ± 20) μm2 / μm, the thickness of bronchial wall smooth muscle (area of smooth muscle / Pi) was (48 ± 1 5) μm2 / The area of WA / Pi was (7 9 ± 2 1) μm 2 / μm, the area of smooth muscle was (3 1 ± 20) μm 2 / μm, the difference was significant between the two groups (P 0 01) The number of smooth muscle nuclei (N / Pi) in the asthma group was (0 0 12 3 ± 0 0 0 0 2 7) / μm, and the control group was (0 0 10 ± 0 0 0 3) / μm. There was significant difference between the two groups Significance (P <0 05). (2) The responsiveness of airway smooth muscle to adenosine (PMS) in asthma group was 0 34 ± 0 0 7, and the control group was 0 2 9 ± 0 0 8, the difference between the two groups was significant (P <0 0 5), combined with aminophylline and adenosine, asthma PMS was 0 2 6 ± 0 0 7, compared with the adenosine alone group (0 34 ± 0 0 7) difference was significant (P 0 01 ). (3) The PMS of asthma group under the action of Ach was 0 24 ± 0 0 4, while the control group was 0 19 ± 0 0 6, the difference was significant (P 0 05) between the two groups. Combined heparin and Ach After the asthma group PMS was 0 2 0 ± 0 0 4, and Ach group alone