The Influence of the Type of Resuscitation Fluid on Gut Injury and Distant Organ Injury in a Rat Model of Trauma/Hemorrhagic Shock

ArticleinThe Journal of trauma 65(2):409-14; discussion 414-5 · August 2008with4 Reads
Impact Factor: 2.96 · DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181719708 · Source: PubMed


    Recognition that resuscitation with Ringers lactate (RL) potentiates trauma-hemorrhagic shock (T/HS)-induced organ injury and systemic inflammation has led to a search for improved initial fluid resuscitation regimens. However, one relatively neglected component in the search for new and novel resuscitation strategies is a determination of what fluid resuscitation therapy (i.e., control group) the new experimental regimen of interest should be tested against. Thus, we tested the effects of three commonly used resuscitation strategies on trauma-shock-induced gut and lung injury, as well as neutrophil activation and red blood cell (RBC) function.
    Male Sprague Dawley rats were subjected to a laparotomy (trauma) and 90 minutes of sham shock (trauma-sham shock [T/SS]) or a laparotomy plus hemorrhagic shock (T/HS), followed by a reperfusion period of 3 hours. The T/HS groups were resuscitated either with their shed blood (SB), or half the SB and 1.5 times the SB volume as RL (SB/RL), or 3 times the SB volume as RL (3RL). The T/SS groups received either no resuscitation or RL at 1.5 times the SB volume of the T/HS rats. Gut injury was quantified by measuring intestinal permeability to flourescein dextran (FD-4), as well as by histologic analysis of the terminal ileum. Lung injury was assessed histologically and by the magnitude of neutrophil sequestration as reflected in myeloperoxidase levels. Neutrophil activation was measured by quantitating the level of CD11b expression using flow cytometry. RBC injury was analyzed by measuring the RBC deformability.
    As compared with the T/SS groups, all three T/HS resuscitation regimens were associated with morphologic evidence of gut and lung injury, increased gut permeability, pulmonary leukosequestration, systemic neutrophil activation, and decreased RBC deformability (p < 0.05). However, the effect of the resuscitation regimens varied based on the tissues and cells tested. Morphologically, gut and lung injury as well as pulmonary neutrophil sequestration was worse in the 3RL T/HS group than the other two T/HS groups. As compared with the other two T/HS resuscitation regimens, resuscitation with the SB/RL combination was associated with less of an increase in gut permeability, systemic neutrophil activation, and RBC rigidification (p < 0.05).
    The type of resuscitation regimen used influenced the extent of organ injury and cellular activation or dysfunction observed after T/HS with different resuscitation regimens showing varying effects depending on the cell or organ tested. Thus, when testing novel fluid resuscitation regimen, attention must be paid to the control resuscitation regimen used.