Effect of Topical Anaesthetics on Interstitial Colloid Osmotic Pressure in Human Subcutaneous Tissue Sampled by Wick Technique

To measure colloid osmotic pressure in interstitial fluid (COP(i)) from human subcutaneous tissue with the modified wick technique in order to determine influence of topical application of anaesthetics, dry vs. wet wick and implantation time on COP(i).In 50 healthy volunteers interstitial fluid (IF) was collected by subcutaneous implantation of multi-filamentous nylon wicks. Study subjects were allocated to two groups; one for comparing COP(i) obtained from dry and saline soaked wicks, and one for comparing COP(i) from unanaesthetized skin, and skin after application of a eutectic mixture of local anaesthetic (EMLA®, Astra Zeneca) cream. IF was sampled from the skin of the shoulders, and implantation time was 30, 60, 75, 90 and 120 min. Colloid osmotic pressure was measured with a colloid osmometer. Pain assessment during the procedure was compared for EMLA cream and no topical anaesthesia using a visual analogue scale (VAS) in a subgroup of 10 subjects.There were no significant differences between COP(i) obtained from dry compared to wet wicks, except that the values after 75 and 90 min. were somewhat higher for the dry wicks. Topical anaesthesia with EMLA cream did not affect COP(i) values. COP(i) decreased from 30 to 75 min. of implantation (23.2 ± 4.4 mmHg to 19.6 ± 2.9 mmHg, p = 0.008) and subsequently tended to increase until 120 min. EMLA cream resulted in significant lower VAS score for the procedure.COP(i) from subcutaneous tissue was easily obtained and fluid harvesting was well tolerated when topical anaesthetic was used. The difference in COP(i) assessed by dry and wet wicks between 75 min. and 90 min. of implantation was in accordance with previous reports. The use of topical analgesia did not influence COP(i) and topical analgesia may make the wick technique more acceptable for subjects who dislike technical procedures, including children.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01044979

Single nucleotide polymorphisms in G protein signaling pathway genes in preeclampsia

Preeclampsia is a pregnancy specific disorder and a risk factor for later cardiovascular disease. The cause and detailed pathophysiology remains unknown. G protein signaling is involved in a variety of physiological processes, including blood pressure regulation. We assessed whether distributions of 3 single nucleotide polymorphisms in genes coding for components of G protein signaling pathways that have been associated with hypertension differ between women with preeclampsia and normotensive pregnant women; the G protein beta3 subunit gene (GNB3) C825T polymorphism (rs5443), the angiotensin II type 1 receptor gene (AGTR1) 3'UTR A1166C polymorphism (rs5186), and the regulator of G protein signaling 2 gene (RGS2) 3'UTR C1114G polymorphism (rs4606). Two separate Norwegian study populations were used; a large population based study and a smaller, but clinically well-described pregnancy biobank. A descriptive study of 43 women with eclampsia was additionally included. In the population-based study, an increased odds of preeclampsia (odds ratio, 1.21; [95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.40]; P=0.009) and recurrent preeclampsia (odds ratio, 1.43; [95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.92];, P=0.017) was found in women carrying the rs4606 CG or GG genotype. In early-onset preeclamptic patients with decidual spiral artery biopsies available (n=24), the rs4606 CG or GG genotype was more frequent in those with acute atherosis (resembling early stage of atherosclerosis) compared with those without: odds ratio, 15.0; (95% confidence interval, 2.02-111.2); P=0.004. No association was found between preeclampsia and the rs5443 or the rs5186. The genotype distribution in eclamptic women was not different from preeclamptic women. In conclusion, RGS2 rs4606 may affect the risk and progression of preeclampsia