Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 44, Issue 10, pp 2039–2050 | Cite as

Acid-Independent Gastroprotective Effects of Lansoprazole in Experimental Mucosal Injury

  • C. Blandizzi
  • G. Natale
  • G. Gherardi
  • G. Lazzeri
  • C. Marveggio
  • R. Colucci
  • D. Carignani
  • M. Del Tacca


The protective effects of the proton pumpinhibitor lansoprazole on gastric mucosal damage inducedby ethanol-HCl or hemorrhagic shock were investigated inthe present study. The morphometric analysis of gastric histological sections revealed thatlansoprazole dosedependently reduced mucosal injuryevoked by ethanol-HCl (ED50 = 24.3μmol/kg) or hemorrhagic shock (ED50 = 38.9μmol/kg), these effects being associated with markedincrements of Alcian blue recovery from gastric boundmucus (ED50 = 31.4 μmol/kg and 27.6μmol/kg, respectively). In addition, lansoprazoleinhibited gastric acid secretion from pylorusligated rats(ED50 = 9.8 μmol/kg). Further experiments,performed on rats with ethanol-HCl-induced gastricinjury, indicated that the protective effects of lansoprazole were not modified by L-365,260,suramin, NG-nitro-L-arginine, or systemicablation of capsaicin-sensitive sensory nerves, whereasthey were partly blocked by indomethacin and fullyprevented by N-ethyl-maleimide. In addition, lansoprazoledid not modify somatostatin concentrations in gastricmucosa. The present results provide evidence thatlansoprazole prevents the necrotic damage of gastric mucosa induced by ethanol-HCl or hemorrhagicshock. According to the rank order of ED50values, these effects appear to depend mainly on theenhancement of the gastric mucus barrier rather than on the reduction of acid secretion. It is alsoproposed that an increased production of prostaglandins,as well as an increased availability of sulfhydrylcompounds at level of gastric mucosa may account for the gastroprotective effects oflansoprazole.



Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fellenius E, Berglindh T, Sachs G, Olbe L, Elander B, Sjostrand SE, Wallmark B: Substituted benzimidazoles inhibit acid se cre tion by blocking (H+-K+)ATPase. Nature 290:159–161, 1981Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Konturek SJ, Brzozowski T, Radecki T: Protective action of omeprazole, a benzimidazole derivative, on gastric mucosal damage by aspirin and ethanol in rats. Digestion 27:159–164, 1983Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mattsson H, Andersson K, Larsson H: Omeprazole provides protection against experimentally induced gastric mucosal lesions. Eur J Pharmacol 91:111–114, 1983Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blandizzi C, Gherardi G, Natale G, Marveggio C, Del Tacca M: Protective action of omeprazole against gastric mucosal injury induced by hemorrhagic shock in rats. Dig Dis Sci 39:2109–2117, 1994Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blandizzi C, Gherardi G, Marveggio C, Natale G, Carignani D, Del Tacca M: Mechanisms of protection by omeprazole against experimental gastric mucosal damage in rats. Digestion 56:220–229, 1995Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wandall JH: Effects of omeprazole on neutrophil chemotaxis, super oxide production, degranulation, and translocation of cytochrome b245. Gut 33:617–621, 1992Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Suzuki M, Nakamura M, Mori M, Miura S, Tsuchiya M, Ishii H: Lansoprazole inhibits oxygen-derived free radical production from neutrophils activated by Helicobacter pylori. J Clin Gastroenterol 20( suppl 2):S93–S96, 1995Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haglund U: Stress ulcers. Scand J Gastroenterol 25( suppl 175):27–33, 1990Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Satoh H, Inatomi N, Nagaya H, Iwada I, Nohara A, Nakamura N, Maki Y: Antisecre tory and antiulcer activities of a novel proton pump inhibitor AG-1749 in dogs and rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 284:806–815, 1989Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fukuda T, Arakawa T, Shimizu Y, Ohtani K, Higuchi K, Kobayashi K: Effects of lansoprazole on ethanol-induced injury and PG synthetic activity in rat gastric mucosa. J Clin Gastroenterol 20( suppl 2):S5–S7, 1995Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wallace JL, Granger DN: The cellular and molecular basis of gastric mucosal defence. FASEB J 10:731–740, 1996Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Højgaard L, Mertz Nielsen A, Rune SJ: Peptic ulcer pathophysiology: Acid, bicarbonate, and mucosal function. Scand J Gastroenterol 31( suppl 216):10–15, 1996Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lacy ER, Ito S: Microscopic analysis of ethanol damage to rat gastric mucosa after treatment with a prostaglandin. Gastroenterology 83:619–625, 1982Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Woodruff GN, Hughes J: Cholecystokinin antagonists. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 31:469–501, 1991Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Voogd TE, Vansterkenburg ELM, Wilting J, Janssen LHM: Recent research on the biological activity of suramin. Pharmacol Rev 45:177–203, 1993Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Blandizzi C, Gherardi G, Marveggio C, Lazzeri G, Natale G, Carignani D, Colucci R, Del Tacca M: Suramin enhance s ethanol-induced injury to gastric mucosa in rats. Dig Dis Sci 42:1233–1241, 1997Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pabst MA, Schoninkle E, Holzer P: Ablation of capsaicinsensitive afferent nerves impairs defence but not rapid repair of rat gastric mucosa. Gut 34:897–903, 1993Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Peskar BM, Respondek M, Muller KM, Peskar B: A role for nitric oxide in capsaicin-induced gastroprotection. Eur J Pharmacol 198:113–114, 1991Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Konturek PK, Brzozowski T, Konturek SJ, Dembinski A: Role of epidermal growth factor, prostaglandin, and sulfhydryls in stress-induced gastric lesions. Gastroenterology 99:1607–1615, 1990Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spencer CM, Faulds D: Lansoprazole. A reappraisal of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and its therapeutic efficacy in acid-related disorders. Drugs 48:404–430, 1994Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oates PJ, Hakkinen JP: Studies on the mechanism of ethanolinduced gastric damage in rats. Gastroenterology 94:10–21, 1988Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Geus WP, Lamers CBHW: Prevention of stress ulcer bleeding: A review. Scand J Gastroenterol 25( suppl 178):32–41, 1990Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ruwart MJ, Lancaster C, Nezamis JE, Davis JP, Rush BD, Friedle NM, Pugh C: Timoprazole: A unique antisecre tory and cytoprotective agent. Gastroenterology 82:1166, 1982Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Okabe S, Akimoto Y, Yamasaki S, Nagai H: Effects of NC-1300–B, a new benzimidazole derivative, on hog gastric H+, K+-ATPase, gastric acid secretion and HCl-ethanol-induced gastric lesions in rats. Dig Dis Sci 33:1425–1434, 1988Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kawano S, Tanimura H, Sato N, Tsuji S, Takei Y, Ogihara T, Nagano K, Fusamoto H, Kamada T: Effects of proton pump inhibitor on gastric mucosa hemodynamics and tissue oxygenation in anesthe tized rats. Eur J Pharmacol 211:55–60, 1992Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wallace JL, Whittle BJR: The role of extracellular mucus as a protective cap over gastric mucosal damage. Scand J Gastroenterol 21( suppl 125):79–85, 1986Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ito S, Lacy ER: Morphology of rat gastric mucosal damage, defense, and restitution in the presence of luminal ethanol. Gastroenterology 88:250–260, 1985Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Konturek SJ: Mechanisms of gastroprotection. Scand J Gastroenterol 25( suppl 174):1–28, 1990Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Folkman J, Szabo S, Stovroff M, McNeil P, Li W, Shing Y: Duodenal ulcer. Discovery of a new mechanism and development of angiogenic therapy that acce lerates healing. Ann Surg 214:414–427, 1991Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Alison MR, Chinery R, Poulsom R, Ashwood P, Longcroft JM, Wright NA: Experimental ulceration leads to sequential expression of spasmolytic polypeptide, intestinal trefoil factor, epidermal growth factor and transforming growth factor alpha mRNAs in rat stomach. J Pathol 175:405–414, 1995Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Okita K, Korita M, Nakamishi N, Tekemoto T: Role of epidermal growth factor in protection and repair of gastric mucosal injury. J Clin Gastroenterol 13( suppl 1):S103–S108, 1991Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Romano M, Polk WH, Awad JA, Arteaga CL, Nanney LB, Wargovich MJ, Kraus ER, Boland CR, Coffey RJ: Transforming growth factor-a protection against drug-induced injury to the rat gastric mucosa in vivo. J Clin Invest 90:2409–2421, 1992Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Surrenti C, Milani S, Palatini I, Orsini B, Salvadori G, Calabró A: Role of epidermal growth factor (EGF) in the healing of human gastric ulcer. Dig Dis Sci 38:A12, 1993Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Matsukura H, Masuda M, Uchida A, Kamishiro T: Effects of NC-1300–O-3 on gastric mucus secretion and prostaglandin release in rats. Jpn J Pharmacol 65:319–326, 1994Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hell M, Sewing KF: Effect of omeprazole on eicosanoid formation in and release from guinea pig mucosal cells. Br J Pharmacol 91:69–75, 1987Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ota S, Takahashi M, Yoshiura K, Hata Y, Kawabe T, Terano A, Omata M: Antiulcer drugs and gastric prostaglandin E2: an in vitro study. J Clin Gastroenterol 17( suppl 1):S15–S21, 1993Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tepperman BL, Jacobson ED: Circulatory factors in gastric mucosal defence and repair. In Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract, 3rd ed. LR Johnson (ed). New York, Raven Press, 1994, pp 1331–1351Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Takeuchi K, Okada M, Niida H, Okabe S: Role of sulfhydryls in mucosal injury cause d by ethanol: Re lation to microvascular permeability, gastric motility and cytoprote ction. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 248:836–841, 1989Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hirota M, Inoue M, Ando Y, Hirayama K, Morino Y, Sakamoto K, Mori K, Akagi M: Inhibition of stress-induced gastric injury in the rat by glutathione. Gastroenterology 97:853–859, 1989Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Szabo S, Trier JS, Frankel PW: Sulfhydryl compounds may mediate gastric cytoprotection. Science 214:200–202, 1981Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Takeuchi K, Okada M, Niida H, Okabe S: Dual effects of N-ethylmaleimide on ethanol-induced gastric lesions in rats. Dig Dis Sci 36:870–79, 1991Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Matsukura H, Masuda M, Kawaguchi K, Uchida A, Kamishiro T: Cytoprotective effect of NC-1300–O-3 against gastric lesions induced by necrotizing agents in rats. Jpn J Pharmacol 65:9–18, 1994Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Holm-Rutili L: Effects of omeprazole on gastric mucosal microcirculation and acid secre tion in the rat. Gastroenterology 92:716–723, 1987Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hui WM, Chen BW, Cho CH, Luk CT, Lam SK: Role of gastric mucosal blood flow in cytoprotection. Digestion 48:113–120, 1991Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mertz-Nielsen A, Hillingso J, Bukhave K, Rask-Madsen J: Omeprazole promotes proximal duodenal mucosal bicarbonate secretion in humans. Gut 38:6–10, 1996Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Holzer P, Livingston EH, Guth PH: Neural, metabolic, physical, and endothelial factors in the regulation of gastric circulation. In Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract, 3rd ed., LR Johnson (ed). New York, Raven Press, 1994, pp 1311–1330Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Blum RA, Hunt RH, Kidd SL, Shi H, Jennings DE, Greski-Rose PA: Dose-response relationship of lansoprazole to gastric acid antisecretory effects. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 12:321–327, 1998Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Brunner GH, Thiesemann C: The potential clinical role of intravenous omeprazole. Digestion 51( suppl 1):17–20, 1992Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Levy MJ, Seelig CB, Robinson NJ, Ranney JE: Comparison of omeprazole and ranitidine for stress ulcer prophylaxis. Dig Dis Sci 42:1255–1259, 1997Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Blandizzi
  • G. Natale
  • G. Gherardi
  • G. Lazzeri
  • C. Marveggio
  • R. Colucci
  • D. Carignani
  • M. Del Tacca

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations