Advanced

Microvascular response in guinea pig skin to histamine challenge with and without application of skin window.

Evilevitch, Vladimir LU ; Norrgren, Kristina LU ; Greiff, Lennart LU and Wollmer, Per LU (2004) In Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging2002-01-01+01:00 24(5). p.266-269
Abstract
We measured the microvascular response to histamine in guinea pig skin. Histamine (40 mg ml-1) was given either as a skin prick test or applied topically onto a skin window. The skin window was prepared by applying suction and gentle warming to the skin so that a blister was formed, and by removing the top of the blister. The microvascular response was measured as the accumulation of radiolabelled transferrin in the skin in vivo, reflecting a combination plasma exudation and vasodilatation. In the control (saline) challenge, the response was slightly greater in the skin window than after skin prick challenge and the scatter was larger. Histamine challenge resulted in a significant microvascular response with respect to the control... (More)
We measured the microvascular response to histamine in guinea pig skin. Histamine (40 mg ml-1) was given either as a skin prick test or applied topically onto a skin window. The skin window was prepared by applying suction and gentle warming to the skin so that a blister was formed, and by removing the top of the blister. The microvascular response was measured as the accumulation of radiolabelled transferrin in the skin in vivo, reflecting a combination plasma exudation and vasodilatation. In the control (saline) challenge, the response was slightly greater in the skin window than after skin prick challenge and the scatter was larger. Histamine challenge resulted in a significant microvascular response with respect to the control situation when measured immediately after provocation for both challenge techniques. Ten minutes after challenge, a smaller response was measured, which was still significantly greater than control for the skin prick challenge, but not for topical provocation using the skin window technique. We conclude that the microvascular response to histamine after provocation with the skin prick technique is similar to that after topical provocation using the skin window technique. The skin window technique may have a lower sensitivity than the skin prick technique owing to a higher scatter in the control situation. This difference should be considered when performing and interpreting studies of the microvascular reaction in the skin. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging2002-01-01+01:00
volume
24
issue
5
pages
266 - 269
publisher
Wiley Online Library
external identifiers
  • pmid:15383082
  • wos:000224000700003
  • scopus:5444241975
ISSN
1475-0961
DOI
10.1111/j.1475-097X.2004.00560.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ea5d22f7-1a18-47bc-922f-322f2cf4b30d (old id 127261)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15383082&dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2007-07-09 11:34:30
date last changed
2017-01-01 04:42:20
@article{ea5d22f7-1a18-47bc-922f-322f2cf4b30d,
  abstract     = {We measured the microvascular response to histamine in guinea pig skin. Histamine (40 mg ml-1) was given either as a skin prick test or applied topically onto a skin window. The skin window was prepared by applying suction and gentle warming to the skin so that a blister was formed, and by removing the top of the blister. The microvascular response was measured as the accumulation of radiolabelled transferrin in the skin in vivo, reflecting a combination plasma exudation and vasodilatation. In the control (saline) challenge, the response was slightly greater in the skin window than after skin prick challenge and the scatter was larger. Histamine challenge resulted in a significant microvascular response with respect to the control situation when measured immediately after provocation for both challenge techniques. Ten minutes after challenge, a smaller response was measured, which was still significantly greater than control for the skin prick challenge, but not for topical provocation using the skin window technique. We conclude that the microvascular response to histamine after provocation with the skin prick technique is similar to that after topical provocation using the skin window technique. The skin window technique may have a lower sensitivity than the skin prick technique owing to a higher scatter in the control situation. This difference should be considered when performing and interpreting studies of the microvascular reaction in the skin.},
  author       = {Evilevitch, Vladimir and Norrgren, Kristina and Greiff, Lennart and Wollmer, Per},
  issn         = {1475-0961},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {266--269},
  publisher    = {Wiley Online Library},
  series       = {Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging2002-01-01+01:00},
  title        = {Microvascular response in guinea pig skin to histamine challenge with and without application of skin window.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-097X.2004.00560.x},
  volume       = {24},
  year         = {2004},
}