Mechanisms of Mucosal Protection

  • Sandor Szabo


The analysis of mechanisms of mucosal protection cannot be separated from often referring to the pathogenesis of mucosal injury. Deductions from studies on the mechanisms of gastrointestinal (GI) mucosal damage are frequently applicable to the understanding of mucosal protection. One of the key aspects of these extrapolations is that, according to conclusions derived during the last decade of research on mucosal injury and protection, both processes seem to be multifac-torial or pluricausal. Empirical studies and theoretical analyses performed during the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century generally centered on one damaging element, e. g., acid, pepsin, infection, ischemia. Consequently, protection was also postulated to be operational only against that single damaging agent. Therefore, the development and clinical use of specific protective drugs, such as antacids, antisecretory agents, and antibiotics. The recent popularity of infectious theory of origin of ulcer disease is actually the recurrence of cyclical trends (in intervals of about 15–20 years) following the first extensive implication by Virchow of apparent infectious agents in the etiology of gastric and duodenal ulcers. The consideration of those factors subsequently included bacteria, parasites, and viruses.


Gastric Mucosa Mucosal Injury Mucosal Blood Flow Gastric Mucosal Injury Fluid Flux 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Annotated Bibliography

  1. Bianchi Porro G (ed): DeNol: A new concept in cytoprotection. Scand J Gastroenterol 21(suppl 122): 1–54, 1985. Review of the new concept on cytoprotection, with special emphasis on colloidal bismuth (DeNol).Google Scholar
  2. Brooks FP: The pathophysiology of peptic ulcer: An overview, in: Brooks FP, Cohen S, Soloway RD (eds): Peptic Ulcer Disease, Vol. 4. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 1985, p. 45. This is a contemporary overview of the pathophysiology of gastric and duodenal ulcer disease. Although it focuses on the acid and peptic disorders, it covers other issues related to the pathogenesis of ulcer disease as well. It contains 700 references.Google Scholar
  3. Derelanko MJ, Long JF: Influence of prednisolone on ethanol-induced gastric injury in the rat. Dig Dis Sci 27:149–154, 1982. The gastroprotective action of synthetic glucocorticoids is described.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dupuy D, Szabo S: Protection by metals against ethanol-induced gastric mucosal injury in the rat. Comparative biochemical and pharmacologic studies implicate protein sulfhydryls. Gastroen-terology 91:966–974, 1986. This paper describes the cytoprotective role of metals, with special emphasis on copper, zinc, and cadmium through an SH-sensitive process.Google Scholar
  5. Flemström G, Turnberg LA: Gastroduodenal defense mechanism. Clin Gastroenterol 13:327–354, 1984. This review is concentrated on bicarbonate and mucus secretion, with special reference to the mucus-bicarbonate barrier. It briefly mentions some other protective mechanisms.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Guth PH, Poulsen G, Nagata H: Histologic and microcirculatory changes in alcohol-induced gastric lesions in the rat: Effect of prostaglandin cytoprotection. Gastroenterology 87:1083–1090, 1984. This microscopy paper documents the stages of congestion, as can be detected in histologic sections soon after administration of ethanol in the rat stomach.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hawkey CJ, Rampton DS: Prostaglandins and the gastrointestinal mucosa: Are they important in its function, disease, or treatment? Gastroenterology 89:1162–1188, 1985. This is a major and very critical review of prostaglandins, summarizing the experimental basis and the clinical data so far achieved with cytoprotective and antisecretory doses of prostaglandins.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hollander D, Tarnawski A, Ivey KJ, et al: Arachidonic acid protection of rat gastric mucosa against ethanol injury. J Lab Clin hied 100:286–308, 1982. This paper furnished evidence for gastric mucosal protection by the PG precursor arachidonic acid against alcohol injury.Google Scholar
  9. Lacy ER, Ito S: Rapid epithelial restitution on the rat gastric mucosa after ethanol injury. Lab Invest 51:573–583, 1984. This paper details, for the first time, the importance of rapid restitution of cell migration, as well as the rapid healing of superficial lesions in the gastric mucosa.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Lange K, Peskar BA, Peskar BM: Stimulation of rat gastric mucosal leukotriene C4 formation by ethanol and effect of gastric protective drugs, in: Samuelsson B, Paoletti R, Ramwell PW (eds): Advances in Prostaglandin, Thromboxane and Leukotriene Research, Vol. 17. New York, Raven, 1987, p. 299. This chapter reviews the contributions of regulating leukotriene release to gastric mucosal injury and protection.Google Scholar
  11. Leung FW, Robert A, Guth PH: Gastric mucosal blood flow in rats after administration of 16, 16-dimethyl prostaglandin E2 at a cytoprotective dose. Gastroenterology 88:1948–1953, 1985. This study describes that, in addition to histological evidence of congestion, functionally the blood flow decreases after ethanol, as measured by the hydrogen clearance technique and the flow is maintained if the rats are pretreated with prostaglandins.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Lichtenberger LM, Graziani LA, Dial EJ, et al: Role of surface-active phospholipids in gastric cytoprotection. Science 219:1227–1229, 1983. This paper describes the water-repellant properties of phospholipids and the modulation by prostaglandins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Marks IN, Samloff IM (eds): Sucralfate in peptic ulcer and gastritis: A worldwide view. Am J Med 79 (suppl 2C):1–64, 1985. This supplement summarizes the extensive data base on the experimental and clinical use of sucralfate exerting gastric cytoprotection and acceleration of ulcer healing in the stomach and duodenum.Google Scholar
  14. Miller TA: Protective effects of prostaglandins against gastric mucosal damage: Current knowledge and proposed mechanism. Am J Physiol 245:G601–G623, 1983. This is an update on the rapidly developing field of gastric cytoprotection. Special emphasis is on the mechanism of action of prostaglandins.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Mizui T, Doteuchi M: Effects of polyamines on acidified ethanol-induced gastric lesions in rats. Jpn J Pharmacol 33:939–945, 1983. This excellent study demonstrates the gastric mucosal protection by polyamines.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mózsik GY, Pihan G, Szabo S, et al: Free radicals, nonsulfhydryl antioxidants, drugs, and vitamins in acute gastric mucosal injury and protection, in: Szabo S, Mózsik GY (eds): New Pharmacology of Ulcer Disease. Elsevier, New York, 1987, p. 197. This chapter reviews the role of non-SH free radical scavengers in gastric mucosal protection.Google Scholar
  17. Pihan G, Majzoubi D, Haudenschild C, et al: Early microcirculatory stasis in acute gastric mucosal injury in the rat and prevention by 16, 16-dimethyl prostaglandin E2 or sodium thiosulfate. Gastroenterology 91:1415–1426, 1986. This paper describes the functional detection of congestion by the laser-Doppler technique. The ethanol-induced decrease in blood flow was counteracted both by prostaglandins and sulfhydryl derivatives despite the fact that these two protective agents, given alone, have differential effects on mucosal blood flow.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Robert A: Cytoprotection by prostaglandins. Gastroenterology 77:761–767, 1979. This editorial accompanies the first extensive experimental work and reviews the early data concerning gastric cytoprotection.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Robert A, Nezamis JB, Lancaster C, et al: Cytoprotection by prostaglandins in rats. Prevention of gastric necrosis produced by alcohol, HC1, NaOH, hypertonic NaCl and thermal injury. Gastroenterology 77:433–443, 1979. This is the first extensive experimental work published in a peer-reviewed journal on the concept of gastric cytoprotection.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Szabo S: Biology of disease. Pathogenesis of duodenal ulcer disease. Lab Invest 51:121–147, 1984. This review is focused on the pathogenesis on duodenal ulcer disease, with special reference to new developments in pathophysiology, such as the pathogenesis of preulcer lesions, correlation of biochemical and functional alterations, and pathogenetic elements other than acid and pepsin. It includes 335 references.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Szabo S: Peptides, sulfhydryls, and glucocorticoids in gastric mucosal defense: Coincidence or connection? Gastroenterology 87:228–229, 1984. This editorial succinctly summarizes the defense mechanisms of the gastrointestinal mucosa other than those related to prostaglandins (e. g., sulfhydryls, glucocorticoids).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Szabo S: Mechanisms of mucosal injury in the stomach and duodenum: Time-sequence analysis of morphologic functional, biochemical and histochemical studies. Scand J Gastroenterol 22 (suppl. 127):21–28, 1987. This paper summarizes the functional and structural changes caused by ethanol and aspirin as well as duodenal ulcerogens, with special emphasis on the importance of vascular injury in gastric mucosal injury and protection.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Szabo S, Rogers C: Diet, ulcer disease, and fish oil. Lancet 1:119, 1988. This brief report summarizes the prevention of gastric mucosal injury induced by aspirin, ethanol, and other chemicals in animals pretreated with EPA to decrease production of leukotrienes.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Szabo S, Szelenyi I: Cytoprotection in gastrointestinal pharmacology. Trends Pharmacol Sci 8:149–154, 1987. This review is focused on the new interpretation of gastric cytoprotection in gastrointestinal pathophysiology and pharmacology. Emphasis is placed on the definitions and degrees of cell and tissue protection.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Szabo S, Trier JS: Pathogenesis of acute gastric mucosal injury: Sulfhydryls as a protector, adrenal cortex as a modulator, and vascular endothelium as a target, in Allen A, Flemstrom G, Garner A, et al (eds): Mechanisms of Mucosal Protection in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract. New York, Raven, 1984, p. 287. This brief paper summarizes the findings related to vascular injury in the pathogenesis of acute chemical-induced gastric erosions and endocrine factors in gastric mucosal protection.Google Scholar
  26. Szabo S, Trier JS, Frankel PW: Sulfhydryl compounds may mediate gastric cytoprotection. Science 214:200–202, 1981. This is the first demonstration that sulfhydryl-containing compounds exert gastromucosal protection and exogenous prostaglandin actions might be mediated in part by endogenous sulfhydryls.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Szabo S, Gallagher GT, Homer HC, et al: Role of the adrenal cortex in gastric mucosal protection by prostaglandms, sulfhydryls, and cimetidine in the rat. Gastroenterology 85:1384–1390, 1983. This paper describes the permissive role of adrenal cortex, especially glucocorticoids in gastric mucosal injury and protection.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Szabo S, Trier JS, Brown A, et al: Early vascular injury and increased vascular permeability in gastric mucosal injury caused by ethanol in the rat. Gastroenterology 88:228–236, 1985. This is the first paper in a peer-reviewed journal describing the rapidly developing vascular injury as revealed by vascular tracers, monastral blue, and colloidal carbon after administration of ethanol in the rat. The lesions were prevented by prostaglandins and sulfhydryl derivatives.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Szabo S, Pihan G, Dupuy D: The biochemical pharmacology of sulfhydryl compounds in gastric mucosal injury and protection, in: Szabo S, Mózsik GY (eds): New Pharmacology of Ulcer Disease. Elsevier, New York, 1987, p. 424. This chapter reviews, in a book devoted to modern ulcer pharmacology, the role of sulfhydryls (free radical scavenging and other gastroprotective properties) as related to gastric mucosal protection.Google Scholar
  30. Szelenyi I, Brune K: Possible role of sulfhydryls in mucosal protection by aluminum hydroxide. Dig Dis Sci 31:1207–1210, 1986. This paper presents the SH-dependent action of antacids in cytoprotection.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tarnawski A, Hollander D, Stachura J, et al: Prostaglandin protection of the gastric mucosa against alcohol injury — A dynamic time-related process. Role of the mucosal proliferative zone. Gastroenterology 88:334–352, 1985. This paper compares the protective effect of prostaglandins and emphasizes the importance of the preserving of the proliferative zone for rapid restitution.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Tarnawski A, Brzozowski T, Sarfeh D, et al: Prostaglandin protection of human isolated gastric glands against indomethacin and ethanol injury. Evidence for direct cellular action of prostaglandin. J Clin Invest 81:1081–1089, 1988. Important study demonstrating partial but statistically significant protection of isolated gastric glands against chemical injury.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wallace JL, Morris GP, Krause EJ, et al: Reduction by cytoprotective agents of ethanol-induced damage to the rat gastric mucosa: A correlated morphological and physiological study. Can J Physiol 60:1686–1699, 1982. This paper describes the importance of intact basal lamina as necessary to provide scaffolding for the migrating cells during rapid restitution.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sandor Szabo
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PathologyBrigham & Women’s HospitalBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations