7 research outputs found

    Propofol affects the biological behavior of ovarian cancer SKOV3 cells via ERK1/2-MMP-2/9 signaling pathway

    Get PDF
    Purpose: To investigate the effect of propofol on the biological behavior of ovarian cancer SKOV3 cells, and the mechanism of action involved. Methods: SKOV3 cells cultured in vitro were randomly divided into control group, fat emulsion group, low-dose propofol group (LDPG, 25 μmol/L), medium-dose propofol group (MDPG) (50 μmol/L) and high-dose propofol group (HDPG) (100 μmol/L). Apoptosis was determined by flow cytometry, while Transwell assay was used to measure the migration and invasion abilities of the cells. The protein levels of ERK1/2, MMP-2, MMP-9 were assayed with Western blotting. Moreover, the cells were transfected with siERK, and the regulatory effect of propofol on ERK1/2-MMP-2/9 signaling pathway was determined. Results: Apoptosis in HDPG was significantly reduced, relative to MDPG, while migration and invasion were enhanced, relative to MDPG (p < 0.05). Moreover, MMP-2, ERK1/2, and MMP-9 proteins were significantly higher in MDPG and HDPG than in control, fat emulsion and LDPGs (p < 0.05), and were upregulated in HDPGs, relative to MDPG (p < 0.05). In contrast, propofol did not up-regulate these proteins in siRNA-treated cells. Conclusion: Propofol enhances the migration, proliferation, and invasive ability SKOV3 cells, and upregulates the expressions of MMP-2, ERK1/2, and MMP-9 in these cells, via a mechanism related to the activation of ERK1/2-MMP-2/9 signaling route. These properties provide novel leads for the development of new drugs for ovarian cancer Keywords: Propofol, ERK1/2-MMP-2/9 signal route, Ovarian cancer, Biological behavio

    Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

    Get PDF
    Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

    Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study (Intensive Care Medicine, (2021), 47, 2, (160-169), 10.1007/s00134-020-06234-9)

    No full text
    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The members of the ESICM Trials Group Collaborators were not shown in the article but only in the ESM. The full list of collaborators is shown below. The original article has been corrected
    corecore