Advertisement

The Dissimilar Effects of Two RES Stimulants on Shock

  • Gottfried Lemperle
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 1)

Abstract

During the past decade, various agents have been found to stimulate some of the manifold functions of the RES. In animal experiments, an increased state of resistance to certain infections and transplantable tumors after the injection of these agents has often been demonstrated. On the other hand, host defense mechanisms may be adversely influenced by various diseases or injuries. There is evidence that at least some of the functions of the RES are significantly depressed during and after a period of severe traumatic shock. It seems logical that a rise in RES activity may prevent or equalize its depression. Paradoxically, most of the well-known stimulating agents such as BCG [1, 2], pertussis vaccine [3], zymosan [4, 5], triolein [6], and glucan (v. infra) render the animals increasingly susceptible to various forms of shock or endotoxin injections. Only pretreatment with endotoxin provides tolerance toward shock or otherwise lethal doses of endotoxin.

Keywords

Lysosomal Membrane Pertussis Vaccine Liver Glycogen Bacterial Endotoxin Endotoxin Shock 
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.
    E. Suter, E.G. Ullmann, and R.G. Hoffman, “Sensitivity of mice to endotoxin after vaccination with BCG,” Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 99: 167, 1958.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. Saito and E. Suter, “Lysosomal acid hydrolases and hyperreactivity to endotoxin in mice infected with BCG,” J. Exptl. Med., 121: 739, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Rutenberg and G. Michael, “Endotoxin-detoxifying capacity of RES in normal and pertussis-treated mice,” Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 117: 301, 1964.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    B. Benacerraf, G.J. Thorbecke, and D. Jacoby, “Effect of zymosan on endotoxin toxicity in mice, ” Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 100: 796, 1959.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. H. Freedman and B. M. Sultzer, “Modification of lethality of endotoxin in mice by zymosan, ” Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 106: 495, 1961.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. E. Stuart and G.N. Cooper, “Susceptibility of mice to bacterial endotoxin after modification of RE function by simple lipids, ” J. Pathol. Bacteriol., 83: 245, 1962.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.H. Heller, V.Z. Pasternak, J.P. Ransom, and M. S. Heller, “A new RES stimulating agent (restim) from shark livers,” Nature, 199: 904, 1963.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    S.J. Riggi and N. R. DiLuzio, “Identification of a RE-stimulating agent in zymosan,” Am. J. Physiol., 200: 297, 1961.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. R. Rosenthal, “Basket technique for producing standard thermal injuries in mice,” J. Trauma, 1: 560, 1961.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Arturson, “The infliction and healing of a large standard burn in rats,” Acta Path. Microbiol. Scand., 61: 353, 1964.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M.O. Lee, “Determination of the surface area of the white rat with its application to the expression of metabolic results,” Am. J. Physiol., 89: 24, 1929.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. R. Wooles and J. F. Borzelleca, “Prolongation of barbiturate sleeping time in mice by stimulation of the RES,” J. Reticuloendothelial Soc., 1: 354, 1964.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    F.J. DiCarlo, L.J. Haynes, C.B. Coutinho, and G.E. Phillips, “Pentobarbital sleeping time and RES stimulation,” J. Reticuloendothelial Soc., 2: 367, 1965.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Y.B. Kim and D.W. Watson, “Modification of host responses to bacterial endotoxins. U. Passive transfer of immunity to bacterial endotoxin with fractions containing 19S-antibodies,” J. Exptl. Med., 121: 751, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. H. Heller, J.P. Ransom, and V. Z. Pasternak, “New advances in the stimulation of the RES,” Colloq. Intern. Center Natl. Rech. Sci., 115: 89, 1963.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. R. Rosenthal, “Pharmacologically active and lethal substances from skin,” Arch. Environ. Health, 11: 465, 1965.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Fine, “Current status of the problem of traumatic shock,” Surg. Gynecol. Obstet., 120: 537, 1965.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    L.D. Hanback and M.S. Rittenbury, “Response of the RES in thermal injury,” Surg. Forum, 16: 47, 1965.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. Weissmann and L. Thomas, “On a mechanism of tissue damage by bacterial endotoxins,” in: Bacterial Endotoxins, New Brunswick, New Jersey, Rutgers University Press, 1964, p. 602.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Janoff, G. Weissmann, B.W. Zweifach, and L. Thomas, “Pathogenesis of experimental shock. IV. Studies on lysosomes in normal and tolerant animals subjected to lethal trauma and endotoxemia, ” J. Exptl. Med., 116: 457, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    W. E. Farrar, “Endotoxin detoxification by guinea pig tissue homogenates and possible significance of this reaction in vivo, ” Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 118: 218, 1965.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    P. E. Lentz, J.M. Lipo, and W.J. Stekiel, “Effect of hemorrhagic shock on rat plasma lysosomal hydrolase activity,” Federation Proc., 24: 587, 1965.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    J. P. Filkins, J. M. Lubitz, and J. J. Smith, “The effect of zymosan and glucan on the RES and resistance to traumatic shock, ” Angiology, 15: 465, 1964.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    J.P. Ransom, E.G. Bliznakov, and L.S. Tuccio, “The role of lysozyme in resistance of mice to infections with gram-negative bacilli,” in: Estratto da 3° Symposium Internazionale sul Lisozima di Fleming. Milan, Italy, Cesano Boscone, 1964, p. 1.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    K. Saito and E. Suter, “Lysosomal acid hydrolases in mice infected with BCG, ” J. Exptl. Med., 121: 727, 1965.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    T. Fukuda, M. Okada, and T. Kobayashi, “On the mechanism of protection of endotoxin shock by glucocorticoids,” Jap. J. Physiol., 14: 560, 1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    C.J. Nabors, D. L. Berliner, and T. F. Dougherty, “RE cell stimulation and steroid metabolism,” J. Reticuloendothelial Soc., 1: 353, 1964.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    F. J. DiCarlo, B. Dubnick, J. M. Apgar, L.J. Haynes, N.J. Silver, and G.E. Phillips, “Effect of RES stimulants upon liver glycogen levels in mice,” J. Reticuloendothelial Soc., 1: 150, 1964.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1967

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gottfried Lemperle
    • 1
  1. 1.New England Institute for Medical ResearchRidgefieldUSA

Personalised recommendations