Oral administration of probiotic bacteria (E. coli Nissle, E. coli O83, Lactobacillus casei) influences the severity of dextran sodium sulfate-induced colitis in BALB/c mice
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
17176771
DOI
10.1007/bf02931595
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- MeSH
- aplikace orální MeSH
- Escherichia coli MeSH
- histocytochemie MeSH
- imunoglobulin A analýza MeSH
- kolon mikrobiologie MeSH
- Lactobacillus casei MeSH
- modely nemocí na zvířatech MeSH
- myši inbrední BALB C MeSH
- myši MeSH
- probiotika farmakologie MeSH
- síran dextranu škodlivé účinky MeSH
- střevní sliznice imunologie patologie MeSH
- ulcerózní kolitida chemicky indukované imunologie prevence a kontrola MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Check Tag
- myši MeSH
- zvířata MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Názvy látek
- imunoglobulin A MeSH
- síran dextranu MeSH
Our study examined whether repeated preventive oral administration of live probiotic bacterial strains Escherichia coli O83:K24:H31 (Ec O83), Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 O6:K5:H1 (Ec Nis) and Lactobacillus casei DN 114001 (Lc) can protect mice against dextran sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis. A significant decrease in average symptom score was observed in Ec O83-, Ec Nis- and Lc-pretreated group (p < 0.05). Significant differences in body mass loss between Lc pretreated mice with DSS-induced colitis were found when compared with nontreated mice (p < 0.05). PBS pretreated mice had a significantly shorter colon than Ec O83-, Ec Nis- and Lc-pretreated mice (p < 0.05). Administration of Lc significantly decreased the severity of DSS induced histological marks of inflammation (p < 0.05). A significant difference (p < 0.05) was also found in specific IgA level against given probiotic in enteral fluid between colitic mice and healthy mice pretreated with Ec 083 and Ec Nis.
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Infect Immun. 2002 Apr;70(4):2057-64 PubMed
Gastroenterology. 2001 Feb;120(3):622-35 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2005;50(5):443-7 PubMed
Clin Exp Immunol. 1995 Dec;102(3):448-55 PubMed
Gastroenterology. 2001 Sep;121(3):580-91 PubMed
Gastroenterology. 1994 Dec;107(6):1643-52 PubMed
Infect Immun. 2001 Apr;69(4):2277-85 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 1998;43(5):545-50 PubMed
Dig Dis. 2003;21(2):105-28 PubMed
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003 Oct;16(4):658-72 PubMed
J Immunol. 2003 Nov 15;171(10):5507-13 PubMed
Clin Exp Immunol. 2000 Apr;120(1):46-50 PubMed
Cell. 1993 Oct 22;75(2):203-5 PubMed
Gastroenterology. 1999 May;116(5):1107-14 PubMed
Pediatr Res. 1991 Apr;29(4 Pt 1):396-9 PubMed
Gut. 2004 Jun;53(6):821-8 PubMed
Lancet. 1999 Aug 21;354(9179):635-9 PubMed
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 Jun;66(6):2578-88 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2003;48(2):281-7 PubMed
Immunol Lett. 2004 May 15;93(2-3):97-108 PubMed
Clin Exp Immunol. 2000 Jan;119(1):57-63 PubMed
Lab Invest. 1993 Aug;69(2):238-49 PubMed
Immunity. 1995 Aug;3(2):171-4 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2001;46(6):573-6 PubMed
Scand J Immunol. 2002 Feb;55(2):204-9 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2004;49(2):203-7 PubMed
Am J Gastroenterol. 2002 May;97(5):1182-6 PubMed
Immunol Rev. 2001 Aug;182:190-200 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2004;49(2):143-6 PubMed
J Dairy Res. 2003 May;70(2):165-73 PubMed
Folia Microbiol (Praha). 2001;46(6):565-72 PubMed
Am J Physiol. 1999 Apr;276(4 Pt 1):G941-50 PubMed
Probiotic Lactobacillus strains: in vitro and in vivo studies
Factors for bile tolerance in Lactococcus lactis: analysis by using plasmid variants
Probiotic potential of enterococci isolated from canine feed