Barrier Effect of a New Topical Agent on Damaged Esophageal Mucosa: Experimental Study on an ex vivo Swine Model.
EBD
Evans blue dye
GERD
animal model
bioadhesion
esophagus
gastroesophageal reflux disease
Journal
Clinical and experimental gastroenterology
ISSN: 1178-7023
Titre abrégé: Clin Exp Gastroenterol
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101532800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
02
07
2020
accepted:
07
10
2020
entrez:
23
11
2020
pubmed:
24
11
2020
medline:
24
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
AL2106 is a new medical device based on a mixture of chondroitin sulphate in a xyloglucan and glycerol solution made to maximize its bioadhesive capability to the esophageal mucosa. The aim of the present study was twofold to evaluate the AL2106 protective effect on the esophageal mucosa when exposed to an acidic solution mimicking gastric reflux and to assess the resilience of this effect to saline washing. A porcine ex vivo model was used and the effects of the new medical device were compared to a sodium alginate suspension (SAS) already present on the market which was assumed as reference. Mucosal damage was induced in 19 porcine esophagi by perfusion with an acidic solution added with pepsin, and Evans blue dye (EBD) tissue uptake was used as an indicator of mucosal permeability. The EBD penetration, expressed as EBD µg/g of dry tissue, was assessed in specimens of untreated damaged mucosa and in specimens treated with AL2106 or SAS. The same evaluation was carried out after washing with normal saline. Both topical agents tested significantly reduced the EBD uptake by more than 60% (AL2106 8.4±4.5, SAS 3.6±2.7 vs control 23.2±13.1, p<0.01). The saline washing did not cause any significant reduction in the protective effect of AL2106 (8.6±5.9), while it significantly reduced that of SAS (5.9±4.3, p<0.05). The new AL2106 medical device showed a good barrier effect against a reflux-like damaging solution and preserved this effect after the mucosal washing test, thus suggesting its possible relevance for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33223844
doi: 10.2147/CEG.S269568
pii: 269568
pmc: PMC7671490
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
569-576Informations de copyright
© 2020 Salaroli et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Alfasigma Spa was not involved in the study design, or in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the authors and were not influenced by Alfasigma in any way. Alfasigma has agreed with the decision to submit this article for publication. Fiorella Calanni and Antonella Ferrieri are employees of Alfasigma. Maria Laura Bacci reports grants from Alfasigma during the conduct of the study. Fabio Baldi reports personal fees from Alfasigma during the conduct of the study. The authors report no other potential conflicts of interest for this work.
Références
Eur J Pharm Sci. 2002 Jun;15(5):479-88
pubmed: 12036724
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan;48(1):6-12
pubmed: 23787250
J Cell Mol Med. 2009 Aug;13(8A):1451-63
pubmed: 19522843
Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2015 Jul;17(7):451
pubmed: 26122249
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2012;5:103-7
pubmed: 22767997
Brain Inj. 2016;30(4):462-7
pubmed: 26934476
Dis Esophagus. 2017 May 1;30(5):1-9
pubmed: 28375448
Gut. 2012 Sep;61(9):1340-54
pubmed: 22684483
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2013 Dec;17(24):3272-8
pubmed: 24379055
Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Apr;108(4):535-43
pubmed: 23358463
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Jan 1;21(1):29-34
pubmed: 15644042
Eur J Pharm Sci. 2005 Jan;24(1):107-14
pubmed: 15626584
Int J Pharm. 2002 May 15;238(1-2):123-32
pubmed: 11996816
World J Clin Cases. 2018 Dec 6;6(15):892-900
pubmed: 30568943
J Neurosci Methods. 1983 May;8(1):41-9
pubmed: 6876872
Nature. 1983 Mar 17-23;302(5905):251-3
pubmed: 6188055
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Oct;36(7):635-43
pubmed: 22860764
Complement Ther Med. 2009 Jan;17(1):56-62
pubmed: 19114230