Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (26)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tome, L.
Right arrow Articles by Seguro, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tome, L.
Right arrow Articles by Seguro, A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol 14, Issue 5 1139-1145, Copyright © 1999 by Oxford University Press


ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Beneficial and harmful effects of L-arginine on renal ischaemia

L Tome, L Yu, I de Castro, S Campos and A Seguro
Laboratorio de Pesquisa Basica, Department of Nephrology, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil; Corresponding author

Background. The role of nitric oxide (NO) in acute renal failure (ARF) is not yet completely understood. L-Arginine (L-arg) is protective against different ARF models, while L-arg addition in isolated proximal tubules enhances hypoxia/reoxygenation (H/R) injury. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of L-arg on renal ischaemia. Methods. In in vivo studies, Wistar rats were subjected to 60 min renal artery clamping, and renal function was evaluated 2 and 15 days after ischaemia. Four groups were studied: (1) control; (2) acute L-arg (50 mg/kg/bw i.v.); (3) L-nitro-arginine-methyl esther (L-NAME; 0.5 mg/kg/bw i.v.); and (4) chronic L-arg (L-arg 0.25% in drinking water/7 days). For the in vitro studies, proximal tubules (PTs), isolated by collagenase digestion and Percoll gradient, were studied from three groups: (1) untreated; (2) L-arg-treated (L-arg 0.25% in drinking water/7 days); and (3) L-NAME-treated rats (3 mg/kg in drinking water/7 days). PTs were kept oxygenated or subjected to 15 min hypoxia (H-15) and 35 min reoxygenation (R-35). In some experiments, additional doses of L-arg and L-NAME were administered. Cell injury was assessed by lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) release. NO production was evaluated by NO2-/NO3- measurement (Griess reaction) in both urine and isolation medium/ Results. After 2 days, L-arg infusion protected against ischaemia compared with control rats (0.4 vs 0.2 ml/min/100 g, P<0.001), while neither L-NAME nor chronic L-arg supplementation ameliorated renal function. After 15 days, both acute and chronic L-arg groups showed a higher glomerular filtration rate (0.6 and 0.75 ml/min/100 g) compared with control rats (0.3 ml/min/100 g, P<0.05) and L-NAME-treated rats (0.2 ml/min/100 g, P<0.05). Despite similar recovery in both L-arg groups, the mortality rate was 25% in the chronic L group. Tubular function was also better preserved in the acute L-arg group. PTs isolated from L-arg-treated rats were more sensitive to isolation injury. L-Arg addition enhanced H/R injury (44.9 vs 51.8%, P<0.05), whereas L-NAME addition protected (44.9 vs 24%, P<0.001) in untreated rats. In L-arg-treated rats, addition of L-arg did not enhance H/R injury (49.6 vs 53.5%, NS) and L-NAME was still protective (49.6 vs 53.5%, NS) and L-NAME was still protective (49.6 vs 32.3%, P<0.001). In PTs from L-NAME-treated rats, L-arg addition also did not enhance H/R injury (50 vs 54%, NS) whereas L-NAME was protective (50 vs 27%, P<0.001). NO2-/NO3- production paralleled L-arg and L-NAME supplementation. Conclusion. It was demonstrated that acute L-arg infusion was beneficial in in vivo renal ischaemia while it was harmful in isolated H/R tubules. In contrast, chronic L-arg supplementation was deleterious both in in vivo and in vitro renal ischaemia, suggesting that injurious effects had overcome the beneficial effects during excess NO exposure. Keywords: acute renal failure; L-arginine, ischaemia; L-NAME; nitric oxide; proximal tubules
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cardiovasc ResHome page
T. M.C. Brunini, A. C. Mendes-Ribeiro, J. C. Ellory, and G. E. Mann
Platelet nitric oxide synthesis in uremia and malnutrition: A role for L-arginine supplementation in vascular protection?
Cardiovasc Res, January 15, 2007; 73(2): 359 - 367.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol.Home page
S. Knight and E. J. Johns
Effect of COX inhibitors and NO on renal hemodynamics following ischemia-reperfusion injury in normotensive and hypertensive rats
Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, November 1, 2005; 289(5): F1072 - F1077.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
A. S. De Vriese
Prevention and Treatment of Acute Renal Failure in Sepsis
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2003; 14(3): 792 - 805.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
K. Lopau, L. Hefner, G. Bender, E. Heidbreder, and C. Wanner
Haemodynamic effects of valsartan in acute renal ischaemia/reperfusion injury
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., August 1, 2001; 16(8): 1592 - 1597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.