The route and timing of hydrogen sulfide therapy critically impacts intestinal recovery following ischemia and reperfusion injury

Abstract

PURPOSE: Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) has many beneficial properties and may serve as a novel treatment in patients suffering from intestinal ischemia-reperfusion injury (I/R). The purpose of this study was to examine the method of delivery and timing of administration of H2S for intestinal therapy during ischemic injury. We hypothesized that 1) route of administration of hydrogen sulfide would impact intestinal recovery following acute mesenteric ischemia and 2) preischemic H2S conditioning using the optimal mode of administration as determined above would provide superior protection compared to postischemic application. METHODS: Male C57BL/6J mice underwent intestinal ischemia by temporary occlusion of the superior mesenteric artery. Following ischemia, animals were treated according to one of the following (N=6 per group): intraperitoneal or intravenous injection of GYY4137 (H2S-releasing donor, 50mg/kg in PBS), vehicle, inhalation of oxygen only, inhalation of 80ppm hydrogen sulfide gas. Following 24-h recovery, perfusion was assessed via laser Doppler imaging, and animals were euthanized. Perfusion and histology data were assessed, and terminal ileum samples were analyzed for cytokine production following ischemia. Once the optimal route of administration was determined, preischemic conditioning with H2S was undertaken using that route of administration. All data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney. P-values <0.05 were significant. RESULTS: Mesenteric perfusion following intestinal I/R was superior in mice treated with intraperitoneal (IP) GYY4137 (IP vehicle: 25.6±6.0 vs. IP GYY4137: 79.7±15.1; p=0.02) or intravenous (IV) GYY4137 (IV vehicle: 36.3±5.9 vs. IV GYY4137: 100.7±34.0; p=0.03). This benefit was not observed with inhaled H2S gas (O2 vehicle: 66.6±11.4 vs. H2S gas: 81.8±6.0; p=0.31). However, histological architecture was only preserved with intraperitoneal administration of GYY4127 (IP vehicle: 3.4±0.4 vs. IP GYY4137: 2±0.3; p=0.02). Additionally, IP GYY4137 allowed for significant attenuation of inflammatory chemokine production of IL-6, IP-10 and MIP-2. We then analyzed whether there was a difference between pre- and postischemic administration of IP GYY4137. We found that preconditioning of animals with intraperitoneal GYY4137 only added minor improvements in outcomes compared to postischemic application. CONCLUSION: Therapeutic benefits of H2S are superior with intraperitoneal application of an H2S donor compared to other administration routes. Additionally, while intraperitoneal treatment in both the pre- and postischemic period is beneficial, preischemic application of an H2S donor was found to be slightly better. Further studies are needed to examine long term outcomes and further mechanisms of action prior to widespread clinical application. TYPE OF STUDY: Basic science. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.