Studies done using the in vivo mouse model of population analysis of mesothelium showed that dialysis solutions containing high concentrations of glucose induced the development of a hypertrophic phenotype. Since these changes were neither related to the low pH nor to the presence of lactate buffer, we hypothesized that the presence of glucose was at the origin of the observed alterations. Theoretical analysis of the problem points to three possible mechanisms: hyperosmolality; metabolic changes derived from the high-glucose concentration itself, and/or the presence of products derived from the nonenzymatic degradation of glucose. The present study was designed to demonstrate or rule out the eventual effect of hyperosmolality upon the monolayer, applying the in vivo mouse model of population analysis of mesothelium. For this purpose, morphometric observations made in mice injected once a day during 30 consecutive days with a filter-sterilized 4.25% solution of mannitol (233.29 mM) were compared with those seen in intact mice and in a previously reported group of animals exposed to heat-sterilized fluid, having an equimolar concentration of glucose (235.9 mM), and the same osmolality (486 mosm/l) and electrolyte concentrations. The main findings observed in the mannitol-treated mice during the period of exposure included increased cell size and cytoplasmic surface area, as well as decreased cell viability. The regenerative capabilities of the exposed mesothelium remained intact. After a recovery period of 7 days, the aforementioned parameters reverted to normal values. This pattern is significantly different from the hypertrophic, senescent and low regenerative phenotype observed in mice treated with the high-glucose concentration solution. We conclude that, at least in the in vivo and in situ setup, the detrimental effects of hyperosmolality alone upon the exposed mesothelium are quite limited and fully reversible within a recovery period of 7 days.

Keywords:
Peritoneal dialysis solutions, Biocompatibility, Population analysis of mesothelium, Mesothelium, Mannitol, Hyperosmolality of dialysis fluids
1.
Breborowicz A, Rodela H, Oreopoulos DG: Toxicity of osmotic solutes on human mesothelial cells in vitro. Kidney Int 1992;41:1280–1285.
2.
Breborowicz A, Balaskas E, Oreopoulos GD, Martis L, Serkes K, Oreopoulos DG: In vitro study of the effect of osmotic solutes on the interactions between cells from the peritoneum and peritoneal cavity. Perit Dial Int 1994;14:149–154.
3.
Jorres A, Topley N, Gahl GM: Biocompatibility of peritoneal dialysis fluids. Int J Artif Organs 1992;15:79–83.
4.
Gotloib L, Shostak A, Wajsbrot V, Kushnier R: The cytochemical profile of visceral mesothelium under the influence of lactated hyperosmolar peritoneal dialysis solutions. Nephron 1995;69:466–471.
5.
Gotloib L, Wajsbrot V, Shostak A, Kushnier R: Acute and long term changes observed in imprints of mice mesothelium exposed to glucose enriched, lactated buffered dialysis solutions. Nephron 1995;70:466–477.
6.
Gotloib L, Shostak A: Large mesothelial cells in peritoneal dialysis: A sign of degeneration or adaptation? Perit Dial Int 1996;16:118.
7.
Gotloib L, Shostak A, Wajsbrot V: Detrimental effects of peritoneal dialysis solutions upon in vivo and in situ exposed mesothelium. Perit Dial Int 1997;17(suppl 2):13–16.
8.
Wajsbrot V, Shostak A, Gotloib L, Kushnier R: Biocompatibility of a glucose free, acidic lactated solution for peritoneal dialysis evaluated by population analysis of mesothelium. Nephron 1998;79:322–332.
9.
Martinson E, Wieslander A, Kjellstrand P, Boberg V: Toxicity of heat sterilized peritoneal dialysis fluids is derived from the degradation of glucose. ASAIO 1992;38:M370–M372.
10.
Wieslander AP: Cytotoxicity of peritoneal dialysis fluid. Is it related to glucose breackdown products? Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996;11:958–959.
11.
Lamb EJ, Cattell WR, Dawnay AB: In vitro formation of advanced glycation end products in peritoneal dialysis fluid. Kidney Int 1995;47:1768–1774.
12.
Institute of Laboratory Animals Resources: Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. DHEW Pub. No. (NIH) 72–73. Washington, National Institutes of Health, 1972.
13.
Mitruka B, Rawnsley HM, Vadhera DV: Animals for Medical Research. New York, Wiley, 1976, pp 1–21.
14.
Rohlf FJ, Sokal RR: Statistical Tables. San Francisco, Freeman, 1981, pp 71–75.
15.
Weibel ER, Staubl W, Gnagi HR, Hess FA: Correlated morphometric and biochemical studies on the liver cell. I. Morphometric model, stereological methods, and normal morphometric data for rat liver. J Cell Biol 1969;42:68–91.
16.
Glantz SA: Primer of Biostatistics. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1992, pp 155–349.
17.
Chamberlin ME, Strange K: Anisosmotic cell volume regulation: A comparative view. Am J Physiol 1989;257:C159–C173.
18.
Trachtman J: Cell volume regulation: A review of cerebral adaptive mechanisms and implications for clinical treatment of osmolal disturbances. I. Pediatr Nephrol 1991;5:743–750.
19.
Yancey PH, Burg MB: Distribution of major organic osmolytes in rabbit kidneys in diuresis and antidiuresis. Am J Physiol 1989;257:F602–F607.
20.
Parker JC: In defense of cell volume? Am J Physiol 1993;265:C1191–C1200.
21.
Yancey PH, Clark EM, Hand SC, Bowlus RD, Somero GN: Living with water stress: Evolution of osmolyte systems. Science 1982;217:1214–1222.
22.
Booth IR, Higgins CF: Enteric bacteria and osmotic stress: Intracellular potassium glutamate as a secondary signal of osmotic stress? FEMS Microbiol Rev 1990;6:239–246.
23.
Yancey PH, Burg MB: Counteracting effects of urea and betaine in mammalian cells in culture. Am J Physiol 1990;258:R198–R204.
24.
Ferraris JD, Williams CK, Jung KY, Bedford JJ, Burg MG, Garcia-Perez A: ORE, a eukaryotic minimal essential osmotic response element. The aldose reductase gene in hyperosmotic stress. J Biol Chem 1996;271:18318–18321.
25.
Okada F, Hosokawa M, Hasegawa J, Kuramitsu Y, Nakai K, Yuan L, Lao H, Kobayashi H, Takeichi N: Enhancement of in vitro prostaglandin E2 production by mouse fibrosarcoma cells after co-culture with various anti-tumor effector cells. Br J Cancer 1994;70:233–238.
26.
Grankvist K, Sehlin J, Taljedal IB: Rubidium uptake by mouse pancreatic islets exposed to 6-hydroxydopamine, ninhydrin, or other generators of hydroxyl radicals. Acta Pharmacol Toxicol Copenh 1986;58:175–181.
27.
Omar HA, Mohazzab KM, Mortelliti MP, Wolin MS: O2-dependent modulation of calf pulmonary artery tone by lactate: Potential role of H2O2 and cGMP. Am J Physiol 1993;264:L141–L145.
28.
Wolin MS, Omar HA, Mortelliti MP, Cherry PD: Association of pulmonary artery photorelaxation with H2O2 metabolism by catalase. Am J Physiol 1991;261:H141–H147.
29.
Leaf H: Regulation of intracellular fluid volume and disease. Am J Med 1970;49:291–295.
30.
Van Bronswijk H, Verbrough MA, Bos HJ, Heezius ECJM, Oe PL, Van der Muelan J, Verhoe GL: Cytotoxic effects of commercial continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) fluids and of bacterial exoproducts on human mesothelial cells in vitro. Perit Dial Int 1989;9:197–202.
31.
Topley N, Mackenzie R, Petersen MM, Beavis MJ, Williams D, Thomas N, Faict D, Peluso F, Coles GA, Davies M, Williams JD: In vitro testing of a potentially biocompatible continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis fluid. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1991;6:574–581.
32.
Breborowicz A, Witowski J, Wieczorowska K, Martis L, Serkes KD, Oreopoulos DG: Toxicity of free radicals to mesothelial cells and peritoneal membrane. Nephron 1993;63:62–66.
33.
Grzybowski A, Breborowicz A, Martis L, Oreopoulos DG: Antioxidant mechanisms in human peritoneal mesothelial cells (MC): Effect of free radicals (FR) and osmotic solutes. Perit Dial Int 1995;15:S38.
34.
Shostak A, Pivnik E, Gotloib L: Cultured rat mesothelial cells generate hydrogen peroxide: A new player in peritoneal defense? J Am Soc Nephrol 1996;7:2371–2378.
35.
Thorpe SR, Baynes JW: Role of the Maillard reaction in diabetes mellitus and diseases of aging. Drugs Aging 1996;8:69–77.
36.
Gotloib L, Wajsbrot V, Shostak A, Kushnier R: Population analysis of mesothelium in situ and in vivo exposed to bicarbonate-buffered peritoneal dialysis fluid. Nephron 1996;73:219–227.
1999
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.