Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:11:45.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pathogenesis of oedema in protein-energy malnutrition: the significance of plasma colloid osmotic pressure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Marta Fiorotto  and
W. A. Coward
Marta Fiorotto
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Nutrition Unit, Dunn Nutritional Laboratory, University of Cambridge and Medical Research Council, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1XJ
W. A. Coward
Affiliation:
MRC Dunn Nutrition Unit, Dunn Nutritional Laboratory, University of Cambridge and Medical Research Council, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 1XJ
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Rats were made oedematous by feeding them low-protein diets (protein: energy (P:E) 0.005) ad lib., and measurements were made of plasma and interstitial fluid colloid osmotic pressures (πp and πi respectively) and interstitial fluid hydrostatic pressure (Pi) before, and at the onset of, oedema formation. Taken together as (πp − πi + Pi) these forces oppose capillary pressure (Pc) and thus determine rates of transcapillary water filtration. Interstitial fluid was sampled, in non-oedematous and oedematous animals, from perforated capsules implanted subcutaneously for the measurement of Pi. Blood, plasma and interstitial fluid volumes were also determined.

2. In Expt I comparisons were made between animals fed on a control diet (P:E 0.210) and the lowprotein diet. In normal animals the ratio πp:πi was approximately 2, but in protein deficiency it was increased since reductions in the absolute value of πi matched those in πp. These changes were observed 2 weeks after the start of the experiment and became more exaggerated when oedema appeared (weeks 18–22).

3. Pi was normally negative with respect to atmospheric pressure but increased to values close to zero when oedema formation occurred.

4. Despite the reductions in πp that were seen in the protein-deficient animals the sum of the forces opposing filtration (πp − πi + Pi) did not change significantly during the experiment.

5. Plasma and interstitial fluid volumes expressed per kg body-weight (measured using 125I-albumin and 35SO42−) were unchanged as πp initially decreased in the protein-deficient animals but increased markedly with the onset of oedema.

6. In Expt 2 comparisons were made between animals fed the low-protein diet ad lib. and others fed on the control diet in restricted amounts so that weight loss was the same in the two groups of animals.

7. The wasting induced by restriction of the control diet did not produce reductions in πp or πi and values for Pi were normal. Changes in the animals fed on the low-protein diet were similar to those observed in Expt I. By using 51Cr-labelled erythrocytes it was shown that the expansion in plasma volume that occurred when oedema appeared in the protein-deficient animals was mainly due to a reduction in total erythrocyte volume. Blood volume did not increase significantly.

8. It was concluded that in the hypoproteinaemia induced in the experimental animals reductions in the value of πp, which might otherwise result in an imbalance of forces that would produce excessive rates of transcapillary water filtration, were compensated for by reductions in πi. Increases in Pi also compensated but were quantitatively less important.

9. The significance of the results is discussed in terms of the pathogenesis of oedema in kwashiorkor and the concept of an oncotic threshold for oedema formation in hypoproteinaemia.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , July 1979 , pp. 21 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1979

References

Alleyne, G. A. O., Hay, R. W., Picou, D. I., Stanfield, J. P. & Whitehead, R. G. (1977). Protein-energy Malnutrition, p. 118. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.Google Scholar
Bratteby, L. (1967). Acta Soc. Med. Upsal. 72, 249.Google Scholar
Cohen, S. & Hansen, J. D. L. (1962). Clin, Sci. 23, 351.Google Scholar
Coward, W. A. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 34, 459.Google Scholar
Coward, W. A. & Sawyer, M. B. (1977). Br. J. Nutr. 37, 127.Google Scholar
Coward, W. A., Whitehead, R. G. & Lunn, P. G. (1977). Br. J. Nutr. 38, 115.Google Scholar
Fadnes, H. O. (1975). Scand. J. clin. Lab. Invest. 35, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golden, M. H. N., Patrick, J., Jackson, A. A. & Picou, D. I. (1975). Lancet ii, 1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyton, A. C. (1963). Circulation Res. 12, 399.Google Scholar
Guyton, A. C. (1965). Circulation Res. 16, 452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyton, A. C. (1972). Pfügers Archs 336, S1.Google Scholar
Guyton, A. C., Granger, H. J. & Taylor, A. E. (1971). Physiol. Rev. 51, 527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffenberg, R., Black, E. & Brock, J. F. (1966). J. clin. Invest. 45, 143.Google Scholar
Hoffenberg, R., Saunders, S., Linder, G. C., Black, E. & Brock, J. F. (1962). In Protein Metabolism, p. 314 [Gross, F., editor]. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
James, W. P. T. & Hay, A. M. (1968). J. clin. Invest. 47, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jelliffe, D. B., Bras, G. & Stuart, K. L. (1954). W. Indian med. J. 3, 43.Google Scholar
Katz, J., Bonorris, G., Golden, S. & Sellers, A. L. (1970). Clin. Sci. 39, 705.Google Scholar
Klahr, S. & Alleyne, G. A. O. (1973). Kidney int. 3, 129.Google Scholar
Lancet (1970). Lancet ii, 302.Google Scholar
Langgård, H. (1963). Acta med. scand. 174, 645.Google Scholar
McMaster, P. D. (1937). J. exp. Med. 65, 373.Google Scholar
Montgomery, R. D. (1963). Archs Dis. Childh. 38, 343.Google Scholar
Picou, D. I. & Waterlow, J. C. (1962). Clin. Sci. 22, 459.Google Scholar
Reeve, E. B. & Chen, A. Y. (1970). In Plasma Protein Metabolism, p. 89 [Rothschildand, M. A., Waldman, T., editors]. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Renkin, E. M. (1964). The Physiologist 7, 13.Google Scholar
Rossing, N., Parving, H-H., & Lassen, N. A. (1976). In Plasma Protein Turnover, p. 357 [Bianchi, R., Mariani, G. and McFarlane, A. S., editors]. London: The Macmillan Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Rusznýak, I., Földi, M. & Szabö, G. (1967). In Lympharics and Lymph Circulation, 2nd English ed., p. 277, [Youlten, L, editor]. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Scholander, P. F., Hargens, A. R. & Miller, S. L. (1968). Science, N.Y. 161, 321.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. E. & Heremans, J. F. (1966 a). Molecular Biology of Human Proteins, vol. 1, p. 602. Amsterdam, London and New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Schultze, H. E. & Heremans, J. F. (1966 b). Molecular Biology of Human Proteins, vol. 1, p. 625. Amsterdam, London and New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Snashall, P. D., Lucas, J., Guz, A. & Floyer, M. A. (1971). Clin. Sci. 41, 35.Google Scholar
Srikantia, S. G. (1968). In Calorie Deficiencies and Protein Deficiencies, p. 203 [McCance, R. A. and Widdowson, E. M., editors]. London: J. & A. Churchill.Google Scholar
Starling, E. H. (1896). J. Physiol., Lond. 19. 312.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. E., Gibson, W. H., Granger, H. J. & Guyton, A. C. (1973). Lymphology 6, 192.Google Scholar
Trowell, H. C., Davies, J. N. P. & Dean, R. F. A. (1954 a). Kwashiorkor, p. 22. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.Google Scholar
Trowell, H. C., Davies, J. N. P. & Dean, R. F. A. (1954 b). Kwashiorkor, p. 218. London: Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.Google Scholar
Viart, P. (1977). Am. J. elin. Nutr. 30, 349.Google Scholar
Waterlow, J. C. & Alleyne, G. A. 0. (1971). Adv. Prof. Chem. 25, 117.Google Scholar
Waterlow, J. C., Cravioto, J. & Stephen, J. M. L. (1960). Adv. Prot. Chem. 15, 131.Google Scholar
Wraight, E. P. (1974). J. Physiol., Lond. 237, 39.Google Scholar