Advertisement

Inflammation

, Volume 6, Issue 4, pp 319–326 | Cite as

Regional differences in dermal inflammatory reactions

  • Claes Lundberg
  • Kerstin Lundberg
  • Göran Smedegård
  • Bengt Björkstén
Original Articles

Abstract

Regional differences in dermal inflammatory reactions in the dorsum of rat trunk were studied in three commonly used inflammatory models, i.e., reverse passive Arthus reaction (RPAR), passive cutaneous anaphylaxis (PCA), and histamine-induced inflammatory (HI) reaction. The RPAR showed an increasing severity from cranial to caudal regions, as measured by water content in the skin lesions. The PCA reaction, as measured by Evans blue leakage was not influenced by regional differences. The HI reaction, as measured by water content and leakage of radioactively labeled human serum albumin ([125I]HSA), was significantly smaller in the central regions of the dorsum than in the most cranial and sacral regions. However, no regional differences were observed when the reaction was evaluated by protein-bound Evans blue leakage. A comparison of the three different methods to determine the HI reaction showed a correlation (r=0.70) between measurements of water content and [125I]HSA leakage. There was less correlation of these two methods with measurements of Evans blue skin lesion diameter (r=0.31 and 0.56, respectively). In conclusion, regional differences in inflammatory responses, and methodological differences to measure them, may influence the results of commonly used tests like RPAR, PCA and HI reactions. Such differences should be considered when quantitating dermal inflammatory reactions.

Keywords

Albumin Inflammatory Response Central Region Human Serum Human Serum Albumin 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Menkin, V., andMenkin, M. F. 1930. Studies on inflammation. II A measure of the permeability of capillaries in an inflamed area.J. Exp. Med. 51:285–293.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miles, A. A., andWilhelm, D. L. 1955. Enzyme-like globulins from serum reproducing the vascular phenomena of inflammation. I. An activable permeability factor and its inhibitor in guinea-pig serum.Br. J. Exp. Pathol. 36:71–81.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Udaka, K., Takeuchi, Y., andMovat, H. Z. 1973. Simple method for quantitation of enhanced vascular permability.Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 133:1384–1387.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gerdin, B. 1981. The use of125I-labeled human serum albumin for quantiation of microvascular permeability in rat skin. Re-evaluation of an old method for studies on substances with an enhancing effect on microvascular permability.J. Pharmacol. Methods 6:167–175.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ungar, G., Kobrin, S., andSezesny, B. R. 1959. Measurement of inflammation and evaluation of anti-inflammatory agents.Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. 123:71–77.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCord, J. M., Stokes, S. H., andWong, K. 1979. Superoxide radical as a phagocyte-produced chemical mediator of inflammation.Adv. Inflam. Res. 1:273–280.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lundberg, C., andSmedegård, G. 1981. Regional differences in skin blood flow as measured by radioactive microspheres.Acta Physiol. Scand. 111:491–496.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnston, M. G., Hay, J. B., andMovat, H. Z. 1976. The modulation of enhanced vascular permeability by prostaglandins through alterations in blood flow (hyperemia).Agents Actions 6(6):705–711.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kopaniak, M. M., Hay, J. B., andMovat, H. Z. 1978. The effect of hyperemia on vascular permeability.Microvasc. Res. 15:77–82.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braga, F., andMota, I. 1976. Homologous passive cutaneous anaphylaxis (PCA) in mice and heterologous PCA induced in rats with mouse IgE.Immunology 30:655–669.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nordvall, L., Grimmer, Ö., Karlsson, T., andBjörksten, B. 1982. Characterization of the mouse and rat IgE antibody responses to timothy pollen by means of crossed radioimmunoelectrophoresis.Allergy 37:259–264.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chang, Y.-H., andOtterness, I. G. 1981. Effects of pharmacologic agents on the reversed passive Arthus reaction in the rat.Eur. J. Pharmacol. 69: 155–164.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hutchcroft, B. J., Moore, E. G., andOrange, R. P. 1979. The effects of H1 and H2 receptor antagonism on the response of monkey skin to intradermal histamine, reverse-type anaphylaxis, and passive cutaneous anaphylaxis.J. Allergy. Clin. Immunol. 63:376–382.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Okudaira, H., Suzuki, T., andOgita, T. 1980. A study of the rat passive cutaneous anaphylaxis (PCA) reaction for the assay of mouse IgE antibody.J. Immunol. Methods 33:369–377.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Majno, G., Palade, G. E., andSchoefl, G. I. 1961. Studies on inflammation. II. The site of action of histamine and serotonin along the vascular tree: A topographic study.J. Biophys. Biochem. Cytol. 11:607–626.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng, H. C., Reavis, O. K., Munro, N. L., andWoodward, J. K. 1979. Cutaneous vascular histamine H1 and H2 receptors in the guinea-pig: The histamine skin wheal as a cutaneous vascular model.Arch. Int. Pharmacodyn. 240:214–219.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claes Lundberg
    • 1
  • Kerstin Lundberg
    • 2
  • Göran Smedegård
    • 3
  • Bengt Björkstén
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical ResearchPharmacia ABUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Experimental MedicinePharmacia ABUppsalaSweden
  3. 3.Department of Experimental Allergy ResearchPharmacia ABUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations