Watanabe Miwa, Osada Hironari, Shimizu Sunao, Goto Shun, Nagai Makoto, Shirai Junsuke, Sasaki Kazuaki, Shimoda Minoru, Itoh Hiroshi, Ohmori Keitaro
Am J Vet Res. 2016 Sep;77(9):969-75. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.77.9.969.
OBJECTIVE To characterize platelet-activating factor (PAF)-induced edema and erythema in the skin of dogs and compare those reactions with histamine-induced cutaneous reactions. ANIMALS 6 healthy Beagles. PROCEDURES Experiments were performed at ≥ 2-week intervals. Each dog received ID injections (5 μg/site) of PAF C16, PAF C18, lyso-PAF, and histamine. Edema (mean diameter) and erythema scores (none, mild, moderate, or severe) were assessed 30 minutes after the injections. Dogs received ID injections of PAF and histamine each with various concentrations of WEB 2086 (PAF receptor antagonist) or underwent ID testing with PAF and histamine before and 3 hours after oral administration of cetirizine hydrochloride or prednisolone (at 2 doses each). RESULTS ID injections of PAF C16 and PAF C18, but not lyso-PAF, induced comparable levels of edema and erythema. The PAF-induced edema and erythema peaked at 30 minutes and lasted for 6 hours after the injection; histamine-induced edema and erythema peaked at 30 minutes and lasted for 3 hours after the injection. Edema sizes and erythema scores were significantly smaller and lower, respectively, for PAF than for histamine. The WEB 2086 inhibited PAF-induced but not histamine-induced edema and erythema. Cetirizine slightly, but significantly, repressed PAF-induced edema and erythema as well as histamine-induced cutaneous reactions. Prednisolone suppressed both PAF-induced and histamine-induced edema and erythema. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE In canine skin, the duration of PAF-induced inflammation was longer than that of histamine-induced inflammation. The PAF- and histamine-induced cutaneous reactions were effectively suppressed by oral administration of prednisolone. The importance of PAF in dogs with anaphylaxis and allergic disorders warrants further investigation.
目的 描述血小板活化因子（PAF）诱导犬皮肤水肿和红斑的特征，并将这些反应与组胺诱导的皮肤反应进行比较。 动物 6 只健康比格犬。 程序 实验每隔≥2 周进行一次。每只犬接受皮内注射（5 μg/部位）PAF C16、PAF C18、溶血磷脂酰胆碱-血小板活化因子（lyso-PAF）和组胺。注射后 30 分钟评估水肿（平均直径）和红斑评分（无、轻度、中度或重度）。犬分别接受不同浓度 WEB 2086（PAF 受体拮抗剂）与 PAF 和组胺的皮内注射，或在口服盐酸西替利嗪或泼尼松龙（各 2 剂）前及口服后 3 小时接受 PAF 和组胺的皮内试验。 结果 皮内注射 PAF C16 和 PAF C18 可诱导出相当程度的水肿和红斑，但溶血磷脂酰胆碱-血小板活化因子（lyso-PAF）则不能。PAF 诱导的水肿和红斑在注射后 30 分钟达到峰值，并持续 6 小时；组胺诱导的水肿和红斑在注射后 30 分钟达到峰值，并持续 3 小时。PAF 诱导的水肿大小和红斑评分分别显著小于和低于组胺诱导的。WEB 2086 可抑制 PAF 诱导的水肿和红斑，但不能抑制组胺诱导的。西替利嗪可轻微但显著地抑制 PAF 诱导的水肿和红斑以及组胺诱导的皮肤反应。泼尼松龙可抑制 PAF 诱导和组胺诱导的水肿和红斑。 结论及临床意义 在犬皮肤中,PAF 诱导的炎症持续时间比组胺诱导的炎症长。口服泼尼松龙可有效抑制 PAF 和组胺诱导的皮肤反应。PAF 在犬过敏反应和过敏性疾病中的重要性值得进一步研究。
