BioMed research international · 2014
Could pyelonephritic scarring be prevented by anti-inflammatory treatment? An experimental model of acute pyelonephritis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bahat Özdoğan Elif, Özdemir Tuğba, Arslansoyu Çamlar Seçil, Imamoğlu Mustafa, Cobanoğlu Ümit, Sönmez Bircan, Tosun İlknur, Doğan Ismail
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to demonstrate if the addition of anti-inflammatory treatment to antibiotic therapy shows any superiority to the treatment with antibiotic only.
METHODS: Forty-nine Wistar rats were divided into 7 groups. Pyelonephritis was performed by E. coli injection to upper pole of kidneys except control group. Group 2 was not treated. Ceftriaxone, ketoprofen, "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen," methylprednisolone, and "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" were given in the groups. The technetium-99m-dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphies were performed in 3rd day to detect pyelonephritis and 10th week to detect renal scarring. All kidneys were also histopathologically evaluated.
RESULTS: When 3rd day and 10th week scintigraphies were compared, initial 2.00 ± 0.30 point pyelonephritis score resulted in 0.71 ± 0.36 renal scar score in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen" group (P = 0.039). Initial 2.00 ± 0.43 point pyelonephritis score resulted in 0.86 ± 0.26 renal scar score in "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" group (P = 0.041). Renal scar score was declined in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen" group and "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" group compared with no-treatment group on 10th week of the study (P = 0.026, P = 0.044). On histopathological evaluation, it was seen that renal scar prevalence and expansion declined significantly in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen and ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" (P = 0.011, P = 0.023).
CONCLUSION: It was evidenced that ceftriaxone treatment in combination with ketoprofen or methylprednisolone declined scar formation in scintigraphic and histopathologic examinations of the kidneys.
METHODS: Forty-nine Wistar rats were divided into 7 groups. Pyelonephritis was performed by E. coli injection to upper pole of kidneys except control group. Group 2 was not treated. Ceftriaxone, ketoprofen, "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen," methylprednisolone, and "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" were given in the groups. The technetium-99m-dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphies were performed in 3rd day to detect pyelonephritis and 10th week to detect renal scarring. All kidneys were also histopathologically evaluated.
RESULTS: When 3rd day and 10th week scintigraphies were compared, initial 2.00 ± 0.30 point pyelonephritis score resulted in 0.71 ± 0.36 renal scar score in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen" group (P = 0.039). Initial 2.00 ± 0.43 point pyelonephritis score resulted in 0.86 ± 0.26 renal scar score in "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" group (P = 0.041). Renal scar score was declined in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen" group and "ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" group compared with no-treatment group on 10th week of the study (P = 0.026, P = 0.044). On histopathological evaluation, it was seen that renal scar prevalence and expansion declined significantly in "ceftriaxone + ketoprofen and ceftriaxone + methylprednisolone" (P = 0.011, P = 0.023).
CONCLUSION: It was evidenced that ceftriaxone treatment in combination with ketoprofen or methylprednisolone declined scar formation in scintigraphic and histopathologic examinations of the kidneys.