Does selective beta-1 blockade provide bone marrow protection after trauma/hemorrhagic shock?
Background Previously, nonselective beta-blockade (BB) with propranolol demonstrated protection of the bone marrow (BM) after trauma and hemorrhagic shock (HS). Because selective beta-1 blockers are used commonly for their cardiac protection, the aim of this study was to more clearly define the role...
Saved in:
Published in: | Surgery Vol. 152; no. 3; pp. 322 - 330 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
New York, NY
Mosby, Inc
01-09-2012
Elsevier |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background Previously, nonselective beta-blockade (BB) with propranolol demonstrated protection of the bone marrow (BM) after trauma and hemorrhagic shock (HS). Because selective beta-1 blockers are used commonly for their cardiac protection, the aim of this study was to more clearly define the role of specific beta adrenergic receptors in BM protection after trauma and HS. Methods Male Sprague–Dawley rats underwent unilateral lung contusion (LC) followed by HS for 45 minutes. After resuscitation, animals were injected with a selective beta-blocker, atenolol (B1B), butoxamine (B2B), or SR59230A (B3B). Animals were killed at 3 hours or 7 days. Heart rate and blood pressure were measured throughout the study period. BM cellularity, growth of hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) in BM, and hemoglobin levels (Hb) were assessed. Results Treatment with a B2B or B3B after LCHS restored both BM cellularity and BM HPC colony growth at 3 hours and 7 days. In contrast, treatment with a B1B had no effect on BM cellularity or HPC growth but did decrease heart effectively rate throughout the study. Treatment with a B3B after LCHS increased Hb as compared with LCHS alone. Conclusion After trauma and HS, protection of BM for 7 days was seen with use of either a selective beta-2 or beta-3 blocker. Use of a selective beta-1 blocker was ineffective in protecting the BM despite a physiologic decrease in heart rate. Therefore, the protection of BM is via the beta-2 and beta-3 receptors and it is not via a direct cardiovascular effect. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0039-6060 1532-7361 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.surg.2012.06.016 |