29 research outputs found
Aggravated renal dysfunction in Sirt1 knockout mouse after LPS challenge.
<p>Sirt1<sup>−/−</sup> mice and Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup> littermates were divided into four groups (Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/PBS, Sirt1<sup>−/−</sup>/PBS, Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/LPS, Sirt1<sup>−/−</sup>/LPS). Serum BUN (A) and KIM-1(B) Levels were measured 24 h after LPS challenge n≥4 mice/group. * P<0.05 versus LPS/Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup> group.</p
Aggravated renal tubular injury in Sirt1 knockout mice after LPS challenge.
<p>Kidney tissues were harvested 24(n = 5 mice/group). The collected kidneys were stained with H&E staining. (A) Histological examination shows increased tubular injury in kidney cortex of Sirt1<sup>−/−</sup> mice after LPS challenge, including tubular dilatation, flattening (*) and vacuolization (arrows). (B) Quantitative evaluation of morphological tubular damage 24 h after LPS challenge. *P<0.05 versus Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/LPS group.</p
Sirt1 deletion causes significant increase of pro-inflammatory cytokine production after LPS challenge.
<p>Serum IL-6 and TNF-alpha levels were measured by ELISA 6 h (A, B) or 24 h (C, D) after LPS challenge (n≥4 mice/group). *P<0.05 versus Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/LPS group.</p
Sirt1 deletion enhances LPS-induced ICAM-1/VCAM-1 expression in the kidney.
<p>ICAM-1 and VCAM-1expression were assayed 24 h after LPS challenge (n≥4 mice/group). (A, B) Representative blots showing ICAM-1 and VCAM-1 expression in the kidney. (C, D) Densitometry analysis. *P<0.05 versus Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/LPS group.</p
Increased neutrophil infiltration in Sirt1 knockout mice after LPS challenge.
<p>Twenty four hours after LPS challenge, kidney tissues from Sirt1<sup>−/−</sup> mice and sirt1<sup>+/+</sup> littermates were collected (n = 5 mice/group). Cryosections were prepared. (<b>A</b>) Gr-1 was used as a specific marker for neutrophil staining. Neutrophil (arrow) infiltration was detected. (B) The number of neutrophils was counted. *P<0.05 versus Sirt1<sup>+/+</sup>/LPS group.</p
Comparison of registration results of TACICP algorithm with the state-of-the-art intensity-based and hybrid algorithms using average LMSD on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.
<p>HYBRID represents hybrid model method. MI represents mutual information method.</p
Comparison of correct label configuration (dark) and reverted configuration (light) with average LMSD on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.
<p>An asterisk indicates statistically significant (<i>p</i> < 0.05) increment in average LMSD from correct configuration to reverted one.</p
Comparison of different feature-based algorithms using average LMSD (a) and LMAXD (b) on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.
<p>An asterisk indicates statistically significant (<i>p</i> < 0.05) reduction in average LMSD or LMAXD as to TACICP algorithm.</p
RSR<sub>1.5</sub> of ICP and CICP algorithms in two steps on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.
<p>RSR<sub>1.5</sub> of ICP and CICP algorithms in two steps on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.</p
Comparison of ICP (dark) and CICP (light) in two steps with (a) average LMSD and (b) LMAXD on US-MERGE and US-SNAP datasets.
<p>An asterisk in (a) and (b) indicates statistically significant (<i>p</i> < 0.05) reduction in average LMSD or LMAXD from ICP to CICP.</p