Local Administration of Interleukin-2 Protects Mice from Lethal Intra-Abdominal Bacterial Sepsis

  • R. Richards
  • D. R. Green


Bacterial sepsis is one of the major challenges facing clinicians who treat critically ill and injured patients. This is especially true in those cases in which the immune response is impaired, such as following trauma or major surgery [1], and approximately 75% of late deaths following trauma are attributable to systemic sepsis [2]. The progression from sepsis to multiple organ failure and death is complex and depends on a number of factors. Among these factors are a variety of specific and nonspecific host defense mechanisms, including phagocytosis, complement activation, and specific antibody production. In recent years, it has also become clear that specific cell-mediated responses also play important roles in the control of bacterial infection, and it is therefore possible that such responses influence the outcome of sepsis. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in severely compromised patients, and it is therefore under intense study. Animal models of infection with this organism have required extensive pretreatment with cyclophosphamide [3], very large numbers of bacteria [4, 5], or full-thickness burn [6, 7] in order to produce susceptibility to sepsis.


Local Administration Phorbol Myristate Acetate Barium Sulfate Cecal Ligation Bacterial Sepsis 
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.


  1. 1.
    Miller SE, Miller CL, Trunkey DD (1982) The immune consequences of trauma. Surg Clin North Am 62:167PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker CC (1989) Macrophage- T cell interactions in surgical sepsis. In: Faist E, Ninnemann J, Green DR (eds) Immune consequences of trauma shock and sepsis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cryz SJ, Furer E, Germanier T (1983) Simple model for the study of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in leukopenic mice. Infect. Immun. 39:1067.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Grogan JB (1975) Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in mice after treatment with cyclophosphamide. Arch Surg 110:1473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ozaki Y, Ohashi T, Minami A, Nakamura S (1987) Enhanced resistance of mice to bacterial infection induced by recombinant human interleukin-1α. Infect Immun 55:1436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McRipley RJ, Garrison DW (1964) Increased susceptibility of burned rats to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 111:336.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stieritz DD, Holder IA (1975) Experimental studies of the pathogenesis of infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa: description of a burned mouse model. J Inf Dis 131:688–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grobmeyer AJ, Kerlan RA, Peterson CM, Dragstedt LR (1984) Barium peritonitis Am Surg 50:116.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bohnen JMA, Christou NV, Meakins JL (1987) Suppression of delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity and inflammatory cell delivery by sterile barium peritonitis. J Surg Res 43:430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wichterman KA, Baue AE, Chaudry IH (1980) Sepsis and septic shock—a review of laboratory models and a proposal. J. Surg Res 29:189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baker CC, Chaudry IH, Gaines HO, Baue AE (1983) Evaluation of factors affecting mortality following sepsis in a murine cecal ligation and puncture model. Surgery 94:331.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Coligan JE, Kruisbeek AM, Margulies DH, Shevach EM, Strober W (1991) Current protocols in immunology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farrar JJ, Fuller-Bonar J, Simon PL, Hilfiker ML, Stadler BM, Farrar WL (1980) Thymoma production of T cell growth factor (interleukin 2). J Immunol 125:2555.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mosmann TR, Coffman RL (1989) TH1 and TH2 cells: Different patterns of lymphokine secretion lead to different functional properties. Ann Rev Immunol 7:145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chong KT (1987) Prophylactic administration of interleukin-2 protects mice from lethal challenge with gram-negative bacteria. Infect Immun 55:668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weyand C, Goronzy J, Fathman CG, O’Hanley P (1987) Administration in vivo of recombinant interleukin 2 protects mice against septic death. J Clin Invest 79:1756.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goronzy J, Weyand C, Quan J, Fathman CG, O’Hanley P (1989) Enhanced cell-mediated protection against fatal Escherichia coli septicemia induced by treatment with recombinant IL-2 J Immunol 142:1134.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Iizawa Y, Nakao M, Kondo M, Yamazaki T (1990) Protective effect of recombinant human interleukin-2 against lethal infection caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae. Microbiol Immunol 34:185.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Richards
    • 1
  • D. R. Green
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plastic SurgeryUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Department of ImmunologyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations