Methacholine hyperresponsiveness in mice with house dust mite-induced lung inflammation is not associated with excessive airway constriction ex vivo.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 PHYSIOLOGY
Andrés Rojas-Ruiz, Magali Boucher, Cyndi Henry, Louis Gélinas, Rosalie Packwood, Percival Graham, Jorge Soliz, Ynuk Bossé
{"title":"Methacholine hyperresponsiveness in mice with house dust mite-induced lung inflammation is not associated with excessive airway constriction ex vivo.","authors":"Andrés Rojas-Ruiz, Magali Boucher, Cyndi Henry, Louis Gélinas, Rosalie Packwood, Percival Graham, Jorge Soliz, Ynuk Bossé","doi":"10.1113/EP092522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The role of excessive airway constriction in the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine in mice with experimental asthma is still contentious. Yet, there have been very few studies investigating whether the increased in vivo response to methacholine caused by experimental asthma is associated with a corresponding increase in ex vivo airway constriction. Herein, the responses to nebulized methacholine in vivo and airway constriction in lung slices ex vivo were studied in 8- to 10-week-old male mice of two strains, BALB/c and C57BL/6. Experimental asthma was induced by administering house dust mites (HDM) intranasally, once daily, for 10 consecutive days. Complementary ex vivo studies were conducted with excised tracheas to measure and compare isometric force. As expected, the in vivo response to methacholine, and especially the hyperresponsiveness caused by HDM, was greater in BALB/c than in C57BL/6 mice. In contrast, there were no differences in maximal airway constriction between mouse strains, and the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine caused by HDM in both mouse strains was not associated with a corresponding increase in ex vivo airway constriction. The experiments with excised tracheas demonstrated no differences in isometric force between strains and between mice with and without experimental asthma. It is concluded that the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine in an acute mouse model of asthma induced by repeated HDM exposures is not associated with excessive airway constriction ex vivo.</p>","PeriodicalId":12092,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Physiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1113/EP092522","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The role of excessive airway constriction in the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine in mice with experimental asthma is still contentious. Yet, there have been very few studies investigating whether the increased in vivo response to methacholine caused by experimental asthma is associated with a corresponding increase in ex vivo airway constriction. Herein, the responses to nebulized methacholine in vivo and airway constriction in lung slices ex vivo were studied in 8- to 10-week-old male mice of two strains, BALB/c and C57BL/6. Experimental asthma was induced by administering house dust mites (HDM) intranasally, once daily, for 10 consecutive days. Complementary ex vivo studies were conducted with excised tracheas to measure and compare isometric force. As expected, the in vivo response to methacholine, and especially the hyperresponsiveness caused by HDM, was greater in BALB/c than in C57BL/6 mice. In contrast, there were no differences in maximal airway constriction between mouse strains, and the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine caused by HDM in both mouse strains was not associated with a corresponding increase in ex vivo airway constriction. The experiments with excised tracheas demonstrated no differences in isometric force between strains and between mice with and without experimental asthma. It is concluded that the hyperresponsiveness to nebulized methacholine in an acute mouse model of asthma induced by repeated HDM exposures is not associated with excessive airway constriction ex vivo.

室内尘螨引起的肺部炎症小鼠的甲胆碱高反应性与体外过度气道收缩无关。
气道过度收缩在实验性哮喘小鼠雾化甲胆碱高反应性中的作用仍有争议。然而,很少有研究调查实验性哮喘引起的体内对甲胆碱反应的增加是否与体外气道收缩的相应增加有关。本实验以8 ~ 10周龄BALB/c和C57BL/6两株雄性小鼠为实验对象,研究了体内雾化的甲胆碱和离体肺片气道收缩的反应。实验用室内尘螨(HDM)经鼻吸入诱导哮喘,每日1次,连续10天。补充的离体研究通过切除的气管来测量和比较等长力。正如预期的那样,BALB/c对甲胆碱的体内反应,特别是HDM引起的高反应性比C57BL/6小鼠更大。相比之下,两种小鼠品系之间的最大气道收缩没有差异,两种小鼠品系对雾化甲胆碱的高反应性与离体气道收缩的相应增加无关。切除气管的实验表明,不同品系之间以及有和没有实验性哮喘的小鼠之间的等长力没有差异。由此得出结论,在反复暴露于HDM诱导的急性哮喘小鼠模型中,雾化甲胆碱的高反应性与体外过度气道收缩无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Experimental Physiology
Experimental Physiology 医学-生理学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
262
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Experimental Physiology publishes research papers that report novel insights into homeostatic and adaptive responses in health, as well as those that further our understanding of pathophysiological mechanisms in disease. We encourage papers that embrace the journal’s orientation of translation and integration, including studies of the adaptive responses to exercise, acute and chronic environmental stressors, growth and aging, and diseases where integrative homeostatic mechanisms play a key role in the response to and evolution of the disease process. Examples of such diseases include hypertension, heart failure, hypoxic lung disease, endocrine and neurological disorders. We are also keen to publish research that has a translational aspect or clinical application. Comparative physiology work that can be applied to aid the understanding human physiology is also encouraged. Manuscripts that report the use of bioinformatic, genomic, molecular, proteomic and cellular techniques to provide novel insights into integrative physiological and pathophysiological mechanisms are welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信