Display Settings:


Send to:

Choose Destination
BMC Pulm Med. 2010 Apr 20;10:20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-10-20.

Comparison of the effect of LPS and PAM3 on ventilated lungs.

Author information

  • 1Pathophysiology of Inflammation, Research Center Borstel, Borstel, Germany. hphauber@fz-borstel.de



While lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from Gram-negative bacteria has been shown to augment inflammation in ventilated lungs information on the effect of Gram-positive bacteria is lacking. Therefore the effect of LPS and a lipopetide from Gram-positive bacteria, PAM3, on ventilated lungs were investigated.


C57/Bl6 mice were mechanically ventilated. Sterile saline (sham) and different concentrations of LPS (1 microg and 5 microg) and PAM3 (50 nM and 200 nM) were applied intratracheally. Lung function parameters and expression of MIP-2 and TNFalpha as well as influx of neutrophils were measured.


Mechanical ventilation increased resistance and decreased compliance over time. PAM3 but not LPS significantly increased resistance compared to sham challenge (P < 0.05). Both LPS and PAM3 significantly increased MIP-2 and TNFalpha mRNA expression compared to sham challenge (P < 0.05). The numbers of neutrophils were significantly increased after LPS at a concentration of 5 microg compared to sham (P < 0.05). PAM3 significantly increased the numbers of neutrophils at both concentrations compared to sham (P < 0.05).


These data suggest that PAM3 similar to LPS enhances ventilator-induced inflammation. Moreover, PAM3 but not LPS increases pulmonary resistance in ventilated lungs. Further studies are warranted to define the role of lipopetides in ventilator-associated lung injury.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Images from this publication.See all images (5)Free text

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk