Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  Users Online: 860 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  

 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 80-84  

Variations in nitric oxide and endothelin serum levels in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy-treated patients


1 Department for Pediatric Surgery, Clinic of Pediatric Surgery, University Clinical Center Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
2 Department for Urology, Clinic of Urology, University Clinical Center Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
3 Department of Cardiology, General Hospital “Prim. Dr. Abdulah Nakas”; Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Sarajevo School of Science and Technology, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Date of Submission05-Dec-2018
Date of Acceptance24-Feb-2019
Date of Web Publication15-Apr-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Emir Milisic
Clinic of Pediatric Surgery, University Clinical Center Sarajevo, Sarajevo
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijabmr.IJABMR_331_18

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Introduction: Renal vasculature is extremely sensitive to vasoconstrictor effects of endothelin (ET), while nitric oxide (NO) has special role in several pathological renal conditions. Aim: The aim of this study to examine the presence, character, and degree of changes in NO and ET levels in the serum of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL)-treated patients with nephrolithiasis. Patients and Methods: This study included a total of 60 patients that were divided in two groups: Group I (n = 24), in which a total of 2000SWs were administered; 0–2 units; (0.5 units per each 500SWs), and Group II (n = 36), in which a total of 4000SWs were administered; 0–4 units; (0.5 units per each 500SWs). Results: In the Group I median NO serum concentration increased in relation to pretreatment levels (39.04 ± 8.29 μmol/L) specifically 30 min, 60 min, and 24 h following the treatment (39.11 ± 12.60), (41.80 ± 6.89), and (46.33 ± 9.03), where concentration growth after 24 h was statistically significant P < 0.01. The NO serum concentration in the Group II increased in relation to pretreatment levels (38.90 ± 10.33 μmol/L) after 30 min (48.71 ± 30.09), 60 min (54.57 ± 39.76), and 24 h (97.95 ± 72.07). The NO concentration increase after 60 min and 24 h is statistically significant, respectively, P < 0.03 and P < 0.0001. Conclusion
:
NO and ET serum levels are changing under the influence of ESWL, and that the NO and ET changes are directly correlated with the number of administered shock waves and administered energy.

Keywords: Endothelin, nephrolithiasis, nitric oxide


How to cite this article:
Milisic E, Hiros M, Begic E. Variations in nitric oxide and endothelin serum levels in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy-treated patients. Int J App Basic Med Res 2019;9:80-4

How to cite this URL:
Milisic E, Hiros M, Begic E. Variations in nitric oxide and endothelin serum levels in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy-treated patients. Int J App Basic Med Res [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Jun 24];9:80-4. Available from: http://www.ijabmr.org/text.asp?2019/9/2/80/256199




   Introduction Top


Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a treatment of urinary calculosis, which also carries patophysiological consequences, which can be of great importance to the patient. Endothelin (ET) is a potent vasoconstrictor peptide isolated from cultivated porcine aortic endothelial cells.[1] ET biosynthesis begins with creation of pre-pro-ETs, which, under the effect of specific endopeptidases and through pre-pro-ET hydrolysis, transform into pro-ET or big ET in the endoplasmic reticulum. During the further process, part of pro-ET generated in the cell is already processed on an intra-cellular level into mature ET, while the part is excreted in an unchanged form, and is transformed into a mature form in peripheral tissues.[1],[2] Immediately after this discovery, ET isoforms, ET-2 and ET-3, were soon thereafter isolated from endothelial cells. Besides porcine aortic endothelial cells, ET synthesis is present in numerous tissues. Hence, for example, concerning ET-1, mRNA was found in the heart, lungs, liver, spleen, stomach, small and large intestines, muscles, and testicles. Concerning ET-2, mRNA was found in the stomach, small and large intestines, pancreas, and in muscles, while concerning ET-3, in the central nervous system, especially in supraoptical neurons. ET-2 shows close structural similarity to ET-1, with the only difference being the two amino-acids, while ET-3 differs in terms of distribution of six amino-acids. Renal vasculature is extremely sensitive to vasoconstrictor effects of ET-1, more than any other vascular bed.[2] This unprecedented sensitivity is partly related to the high density of ETa receptors found in vascular smooth musculature in all renal resistant vessels.[3] ETb receptors are generally more distributed, with a high concentration in renal collecting ducts. ET-1 is produced in endothelium, and also in glomerular mesangial and tubular epithelial cells. Renal effects of ET-1 include an increase in renal vascular resistance and a decrease in the rate of glomerular filtration and renal tubular sodium handling alteration, leading to natriuresis and diuresis. Nitric oxide (NO) is an important signaling molecule which is active in numerous tissues by regulating different volumes of physiological and cellular processes. Its role was first discovered by several groups of investigators, who tried to identify the agent responsible for vascular relaxation promotion and vascular tone regulation.[4],[5] The agent was named endothelium-derived relaxing factor, and it was initially assumed to be a protein, as are the majority of other signaling molecules. Intracellular NO synthesis may be regulated by various methods, such as cellular NO distribution, change in NO gene expression, enzyme activity and the presence of cellular NO activity inhibitors.[4],[5],[6] In numerous pathological conditions, the role of NO is dependent on the stadium of disease, involvement of NOS and presence or absence of other modifying intrarenal factors. NO's role is special in several pathological renal conditions, such as acute renal insufficiency, inflammatory nephritis, diabetic nephropathy, and transplant rejection.[6] Although NO was initially described as a chemokine vasodilator, it plays an important role in vascular biology, with its anti-thrombotic, anti-inflammatory, anti-proliferative, and anti-oxidative effects.[6],[7] All three NO isoforms are represented in individual segments of the kidney. eNOSis abundantly represented in renal microvasculature, glomerular endothelial cells, proximal tubular cells, the thin ascending limb of the loop of Henle and collecting tubules. Numerous studies have confirmed that NO regulates macrovascular and microvascular action, including glomerular hemodynamics. NOS inhibition reduces basal renal blood flow, with the preservation of auto-regulatory mechanisms. Intrarenal NO regulates the tone and afferent and efferent arterioles.[7],[8] The NO effect on renal flow and electrolyte transport is a result of net effects on renal hemodynamics, renal nerves, and direct tubular transport properties.[8],[9],[10]

The present study was planned with aims to examine the presence, character, and degree of changes in NO and ET levels in the serum of ESWL-treated patients with nephrolithiasis and to determine whether there is a correlation between the changes in NO and ET concentrations in the serum of pre-ESWL treatment patients and the occurrence, character, degree, and localization of changes in vascular renal elements. The study's objective is also to investigate whether NO and ET stand in direct correlation with the number of applied shock waves and administered energy.


   Patients and Methods Top


The study included a total of 60 patients at the Urology Clinic, Clinical Center University of Sarajevo, over a 3-year period. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients older than 18 years with nephrolithiasis (kidney stone maximum 20 mm in diameter, stone must be visible on X-ray), first ESWL treatment (de novo cases), unilateral lithotripsy treatment, without previous kidney surgery, without infravesical obstruction, without proven urinary infection, repeated use of one and the same analgesic, without anticoagulant therapy, without antihypertensive therapy, without use of nephrotoxic drugs prior to and during the treatment, normal blood pressure, general criteria– non-pregnant patients, patients with normal renal function. Exclusion criteria were as follows: kidney stone larger than 20 mm in diameter, acute urinary infection and systemic inflammation, urinary tract obstructions causing hydronephrosis, patients with congenital kidney or ureter anomalies, bilateral ESWL treatment, recurrent cases of urolithiasis, ureteral stones, patients with serum creatinine >350 μmol/L over the past 3 months, hypertension, taking antihypertensive medicines, diabetes mellitus, previous surgeries on kidney, general criteria– pregnant patients, patients with impaired renal function, failure to sign informed consent.

The treated kidney stones were located exclusively in the renal duct system, pyelon (14), upper (11), middle (16), and lower calyces (19). The subjects were divided in two groups: Group I (n = 24), in which a total of 2000SWs were administered; 0–2 units; (0.5 units per each 500SWs), and Group II (n = 36), in which a total of 4000SWs were administered; 0–4 units; (0.5 units per each 500SWs). Samples for determining NO serum concentration were taken before, as well as 30 and 60 min, and 24 h after ESWL treatment, and immediately refrigerated at the temperature of −20°C pending analysis. Pre-refrigeration serum samples were deproteinized so that 0.05 ml of 30% ZnSO4 solution was added to 1 ml of sample. After a few minutes, the sample was centrifuged over a period of 10 min at 700 g, after which the isolated supernatant was refrigerated at −20°C pending the determination of NO32− concentration. The NO concentration was determined by measuring NO32− and NO22− concentration in the whole blood. The concentration was determined by NO32− conversion into NO22− using elementary zinc, and then by measuring NO22− concentration by colorimetrically prepared Griess reagent, consisting of sulfanilamide and N-1-naphthyl ethylenediamine. After 10 min of vibrator stirring at room temperature, light absorption (optical density) was measured by 546 nm filter spectrophotometer. NO22− concentration was red from the standard curve with known NaNO3 concentration (of 1.56–100 nM). Distilled water with added Griess reagent was used as a blind trial run. The same procedure was applied for the direct determination of NO22−, the only difference being that there was no addition of elementaryzinc. Serum samples for determining NO levels were taken at the Urology Clinic, Department of Lithotripsy, while the analysis itself was made at the Laboratory of the Clinical Center University of Sarajevo and at the Institute for Physiology and Biochemistry of the Medical Faculty Sarajevo. Serum samples for determining ET concentration were taken at the Urology Clinic, Department of Lithotripsy, before, immediately after, on the third and 7th day after ESWL treatment. Samples were refrigerated at −20°C, pending measurement. The ET 1 KIT, IBL Hamburg, standard ELISA method was used to determine ET concentration. The results were statistically processed so for each group of subjects, the average value (Mean), standard deviation, standard error of the mean, median value (MED) and percentage differences (P10, 25, 75 and 90%) were determined. Testing the significance of the differences in the average value of the groups of subjects was carried out using the Student's t-test (p), and where it could not be used, the statistical significance of the difference in the MED was tested using the Mann Whitney–Wilcoxon test. The values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. For certain comparative groups of data of the subjects, Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was determined, the level of significance of the same (r − p) and the correlation level for the significance level P < 0.05 (r1–r2). Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethical Committee of the Clinical Centre University of Sarajevo.


   Results Top


In the subjects (n = 24) treated with 2000 SWs, the ET serum concentration increased on days 1, 3 and 5 after the ESWL treatment (3.48 ± 1.17), (3.38 ± 0.68), (3.40 ± 0.74) in relation to pre-treatment levels (3.27 ± 0.36 pg/ml), the increase being nonsignificant [Table 1]. In the group of subjects (n = 36) treated with 4000 SWs, the ET serum concentration shows variable movement. In relation to pre-treatment levels (3.20 ± 0.47 pg/ml), on day one after ESWL treatment the ET serum concentration shows a nonsignificant decrease (3.16 ± 0.48), while on days 3 and 5 following ESWL, the concentration increased in relation to pre-treatment levels, (3.24 ± 0.63) and (3.22 ± 0.28), respectively, the increase being nonsignificant [Table 2]. In the subjects treated with 2000 SWs (n = 24), median NO serum concentration increased in relation to pretreatment levels (39.04 ± 8.29 μmol/L) specifically 30 min, 60 min, and 24 h following the treatment (39.11 ± 12.60), (41.80 ± 6.89), and (46.33 ± 9.03), where concentration growth after 24 h was statistically significant P < 0.01 [Table 1]. The NO serum concentration in the group of subjects (n = 36) treated with 4000 SWs increased in relation to pre-treatment levels (38.90 ± 10.33 μmol/L) after 30 min (48.71 ± 30.09), 60 min (54.57 ± 39.76), and 24 h (97.95 ± 72.07) [Table 2]. The NO concentration increase after 60 min and 24 h is statistically significant, P < 0.03 and P < 0.0001. The NO serum concentrations ratio between the two groups is shown in [Figure 1].
Table 1: Statistic indicators of endothelin and nitric oxide changes following 2000 SWs, as measured in patients following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment

Click here to view
Table 2: Statistic indicators of endothelin and nitric oxide changes following 4000 SWs, as measured in subjects following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment

Click here to view
Figure 1: Comparative nitric oxide serum concentrations in subjects treated with 2000 SWs and 4000 SWs (after 30 min [30 min], after 60 min [60 min], after 24 h [24h])

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Observing ET variations, there are only two reports in the literature about the relationship between extracorporeal lithotripsy and changes in serum and urine concentration. A post-ESWL treatment increase in ET serum levels is present in this study too but is nonsignificant and there is no direct correlation in the function of time and the number of administered shock waves. These data do not confirm the part of hypothesis 1 pertaining to ET-1. Strohmaier et al. concluded that ESWL does not have a significant effect on ET serum concentration movement, and thus causes no significant renal trauma.[11] That same year, Kirkali et al. claimed that post-ESWL treatment ET-1 plasma concentration grew significantly, while in urine that growth was nonsignificant, which means that ET released after this treatment induces hemodynamic changes in the kidney.[12] The same study showed that medicamentous prevention with calcium channel blockers may prevent ET concentration growth.[12] NO, highly effective vasodilator peptide is enzymatically generated through endothelial NOS, to regulate vasodilation through vascular cells of smooth musculature, and antagonizes vasoconstrictor effect of angiotensin II, in the afferent arteriole, which helps regulate renal blood flow, glomerular filtration, and Na homeostasis. NO is also involved in auto-regulation of blood flow, renin secretion, activities of mesangial glomerular and epithelial cells and tubular function. While some authors have shown interest in NO's detrimental effect, it has been clearly proven that NO production increases during renal ischemia. In this study, NO serum concentration movement was monitored 30 and 60 min and 24 h after treatment. In the ESWL-treated group of patients, with the administration of 2000 SWs, the concentration level increased, where only the increase reported after 24 h was statistically significant (P < 0.012). In the patients treated with 4000 SWs, the NO serum concentration increased in all three set temporal categories, but significantly after 60 min (P < 0.033) and after 24 (P < 0.001). Given the NO serum concentration results obtained, which show a certain pattern, it was expected that the concentration after 24 h would show a tendency of stability and return to pretreatment levels.

In their 2003 study, Sarica et al. monitored NO and adrenomedullin serum and urine level movement, and concluded that levels of both tested parameters increased 24 h after treatment, and that the increase was proportionate to the number of administered shock waves. Seven days after treatment, the values were back to pretreatment levels.[13] Park et al. concluded that ESWL raises the NO serum level immediately after, 30 and 60 min after treatment, and the increase is significant. The NO urine increase within the set temporal parameters was not significant.[13] Cyclic 3',5' guanosine monophosphate, as an NO metabolite, increases after treatment within the set temporal categories, and the increase is significant. Aksoy et al. monitored the NO and malondialdehyde plasma and urine movement, with the aim to determine post-ESWL treatment changes in these categories, and what exactly is responsible for the adverse effect of ESWL, tension force, thermal effects of cavitation or formation of free radicals.[14] During all set temporal parameters the NO plasma and urine levels grew significantly in relation to pretreatment values. The increase in malondialdehyde plasma levels was also significant, whereas the increase in the urine level was nonsignificant. In their paper, the authors speculate that the ESWL treatment triggers oxidative stress caused by renal ischemia and the reperfusion process.[15],[16],[17] The NO production increase is interpreted as prevention from vasoconstriction-caused renal impairment.[16],[17],[18],[19] ET and NO values can be an indicator of an early parenchymal damage and damage of renal arterial circulation, and allows the clinician timely therapeutic and diagnostic approach.


   Conclusion Top


Shock waves may affect renal hemodynamics by interfering with endothelial NO production or by stimulating the release of vasoactive substances such as NO and ET, very potent vasodilators, or vasoconstrictors, whose serum levels are monitored over the set periods of time, being very sensitive indicators of ESWL treatment-caused impairment at the cellular level. Based on the study results, it has been clearly proven that NO and ET serum levels are changing under the influence of ESWL, and that the NO and ET changes are directly correlated with the number of administered shock waves and administered energy.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Yanagisawa H, Hammer RE, Richardson JA, Williams SC, Clouthier DE, Yanagisawa M, et al. Role of endothelin-1/Endothelin-A receptor-mediated signaling pathway in the aortic arch patterning in mice. J Clin Invest 1998;102:22-33.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Davenport AP, Hyndman KA, Dhaun N, Southan C, Kohan DE, Pollock JS, et al. Endothelin. Pharmacol Rev 2016;68:357-418.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Levin ER. Endothelins. N Engl J Med 1995;333:356-63.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Yoneyama H, Yamamoto A, Kosaka H. Neuronal nitric oxide synthase generates superoxide from the oxygenase domain. Biochem J 2001;360:247-53.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Yoneyama H, Kosaka H, Ohnishi T, Kawazoe T, Mizoguchi K, Ichikawa Y, et al. Reaction of neuronal nitric oxide synthase with the nitric oxide spin-trapping agent, iron complexed with N-dithiocarboxysarcosine. Eur J Biochem 1999;266:771-7.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Perez-Rojas JM, Kassem KM, Beierwaltes WH, Garvin JL, Herrera M. Nitric oxide produced by endothelial nitric oxide synthase promotes diuresis. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2010;298:R1050-5.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Welch WJ, Tojo A, Lee JU, Kang DG, Schnackenberg CG, Wilcox CS, et al. Nitric oxide synthase in the JGA of the SHR: Expression and role in tubuloglomerular feedback. Am J Physiol 1999;277:F130-8.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Baylis C. Nitric oxide deficiency in chronic kidney disease. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 2008;294:F1-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Majid DS, Navar LG. Nitric oxide in the control of renal hemodynamics and excretory function. Am J Hypertens 2001;14:74S-82S.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Sullivan JC, Pardieck JL, Hyndman KA, Pollock JS. Renal NOS activity, expression, and localization in male and female spontaneously hypertensive rats. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 2010;298:R61-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Strohmaier WL, Koch J, Balk N, Wilbert DM, Bichler KH. Limitation of shock-wave-induced renal tubular dysfunction by nifedipine. Eur Urol 1994;25:99-104.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Kirkali Z, Esen AA, Hayran M, Gencbay A, Gidener S, Güven H, et al. The effect of extracorporeal electromagnetic shock waves on the morphology and contractility of rabbit ureter. J Urol 1995;154:1939-43.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Sarica K, Sari I, Balat A, Erbaǧci A, Yurtseven C, Yaǧci F, et al. Evaluation of adrenomedullin levels in renal parenchyma subjected to extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Urol Res 2003;31:267-71.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Aksoy H, Aksoy Y, Turhan H, Keleş S, Ziypak T, Ozbey I, et al. The effect of shock wave lithotripsy on nitric oxide and malondialdehyde levels in plasma and urine samples. Cell Biochem Funct 2007;25:533-6.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Akin Y, Yucel S. Long-term effects of pediatric extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy on renal function. Res Rep Urol 2014;6:21-5.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Lifshitz DA, Lingeman JE, Zafar FS, Hollensbe DW, Nyhuis AW, Evan AP, et al. Alterations in predicted growth rates of pediatric kidneys treated with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 1998;12:469-75.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Ruffo A, Capece M, Prezioso D, Romeo G, Illiano E, Romis L, et al. Safety and efficacy of low intensity shockwave (LISW) treatment in patients with erectile dysfunction. Int Braz J Urol 2015;41:967-74.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Mariotto S, Cavalieri E, Amelio E, Ciampa AR, de Prati AC, Marlinghaus E, et al. Extracorporeal shock waves: From lithotripsy to anti-inflammatory action by NO production. Nitric Oxide 2005;12:89-96.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Xingyu Y, Guoliang T, Youmei C, Honggen W, Yihong G, Junyi C, et al. The effect of nitric oxide on the pressure of the acutely obstructed ureter. Urol Res 2012;40:163-9.  Back to cited text no. 19
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
   Patients and Methods
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed472    
    Printed36    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded89    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal