Prospective insight into the role of benzyl propylene glycoside as a modulator of the cGAS-STING signaling pathway in the management of nonalcoholic fatty pancreas animal model

BACKGROUND: Nonalcoholic fatty pancreatitis (NAFP) is one of the metabolic syndrome manifestations that need further studies to determine its molecular determinants and find effective medications. We aimed to investigate the potential effect of benzyl propylene glycoside on NAFP management via targeting the pancreatic cGAS-STING pathway-related genes (DDX58, NFκB1 & CHUK) and their upstream regulator miRNA (miR-1976) that were retrieved from bioinformatics analysis. METHODS: The rats were fed either normal chow or a high-fat high-sucrose diet (HFHS), as a nutritional model for NAFP. After 8 weeks, the HFHS-fed rats were subdivided randomly into 4 groups; untreated HFHS group (NAFP model group) and three treated groups which received 3 doses of benzyl propylene glycoside (10, 20, and 30 mg/kg) daily for 4 weeks, parallel with HFHS feeding. RESULTS: The molecular analysis revealed that benzyl propylene glycoside could modulate the expression of the pancreatic cGAS-STING pathway-related through the downregulation of the expression of DDX58, NFκB1, and CHUK mRNAs and upregulation of miR-1976 expression. Moreover, the applied treatment reversed insulin resistance, inflammation, and fibrosis observed in the untreated NAFP group, as evidenced by improved lipid panel, decreased body weight and the serum level of lipase and amylase, reduced protein levels of NFκB1 and caspase-3 with a significant reduction in area % of collagen fibers in the pancreatic sections of treated animals. CONCLUSION: benzyl propylene glycoside showed a potential ability to attenuate NAFP development, inhibit pancreatic inflammation and fibrosis and reduce the pathological and metabolic disturbances monitored in the applied NAFP animal model. The detected effect was correlated with modulation of the expression of pancreatic (DDX58, NFκB1, and CHUK mRNAs and miR-1976) panel.

Outcome of restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion strategies in intensive care unit admitted patients

Background: Anemia is a very common disease in critically ill patients. Approximately 29% of patients have lower than normal hemoglobin levels when admitted to an ICU, and about 95% develop anemia within 3 days of admission

Aim of the Work: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of restrictive and liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies on mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients. And as a result, recommend the more beneficial and the less deleterious strategy for critically ill patients

Patients and Methods: This clinical interventional study was carried out at Intensive Care Unit, Benha Teaching Hospital, Egypt, during a period from July 2017 to November 2017. This study was approved by Ethical Committee of Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, including the informed consents which were obtained from either the patient or the closest family member

Results: Mortality rates in ICU were 16 % and 20% in group A and B respectively, 24% and 28% within 60 days respectively. There were lower mortality rates with group A but with no statistically significant difference between groups according to mortality during ICU Stay and mortality within 60 days

Conclusion: Comparison between the effect of restrictive and liberal strategies of blood transfusion on mortality and morbidity in critically ill patients showed no significant differences. Restrictive strategy is at least as effective to liberal strategy in critically ill patients. Blood transfusion may be hazardous and cost-effective

Recommendations: Anemia is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. However, randomized clinical trials are required to establish if transfusion is beneficial or harmful in anemic patients. A restrictive transfusion strategy should be recommended within the well-studied patient populations and clinical conditions, and the clinicians must continue to use their experience and bedside clinical judgment to advocate the best management for their patients