Skip to main content
MJHS
Navigation
Journal Navigation
Article Navigation
opened article
Volum 10, Issue 3
September 2023
Cover Image

Article contents

opened journal
Volum 10, Issue 3
September 2023
Cover Image

Abstract

Introduction

Endothelial dysfunction is a result of complex pathogenic interface involving inflammation, oxidative stress, disorders of endothelization and hemostasis etc., in both arteries and veins, leading to a lot of cardiovascular diseases. Identifying markers with high predictive value has an important diagnostic and prognostic significance.

Material and methods

To create this review article, we conducted a thorough search for relevant references that are current, specific, and aligned with the goals of the article. We utilized databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane, going as far back as the year 2000 to gather the necessary information. The identified articles were structured based on the main objectives, comprehensively analyzed, and the key findings have been critically exposed.

Results

A few main markers endothelial dysfunction were revealed, which reflect axial pathogenic events such as inflammation, endothelium lesion and reendothelization, inherent hemostasis disorders and prothrombotic risk. Likewise, some distinct morphophysiological traits of arterial and venous endothelium are disentangled, as well as markers having common and distinct predictive power of endothelial dysfunction in arteries and veins. 

Conclusions

Multi-marker panel is a reliable tool for prediction of endothelial dysfunction in both arteries and veins, as well as the risk of inherent consequences. Noteworthy, majority of markers are common for arteries and veins, but some, like C-reactive protein and von Willebrand factor should be treated distinctly. 

Key Messages

What is not yet known about the issue addressed in the submitted manuscript

Currently, there is not a comprehensive algorithm of vascular endothelium dysfunction assessment using circulating biomarkers which refer to most important pathogenic pillars: inflammation, reendothelization and hemostasis disorders for both arteries and veins. 

The research hypothesis

A segregation of leader markers of endothelium dysfunction of arteries and veins based on their pathophysiological role in triggering and worsening of vascular dyshomeostasis.

The novelty added by manuscript the already published scientific literature

Some markers of endothelial dysfunction should be distinctively assessed in regard to their predictive power in arteries and veins, such as C-reactive protein and von Willebrand factor. Likewise, soluble receptor of protein C is a stronger predictor of thrombosis risk linked to endothelial dysfunction in comparison to its ligand.

Introduction 

Vascular endothelium (VE) plays a versatile role in general, and especially, cardiovascular homeostasis control. Since the discovery of nitric oxide (NO) as an endothelium derived factor having a key role in vascular tone regulation, a lot of data are still accumulated available to depict a multi-facet caliber of VE. To note in this regard the property of VE to prevent platelet adhesion and prothrombotic state activation, circulating white cells passage, pathological vascular remodeling and atherogenic plaque progressing [1-3]. Likewise, VE influences angiogenesis and arteriogenesis, processes that have a dichotomic significance, meaning they can have both positive and negative effects, the last being touchy linked to cancer growth and cancer spreading [4]. 

The VE functions in veins and arteries are basically common, although some differences exist, such as: (i) venous endotheliocytes express more amount of NO; (ii) endothelial junctions in arteries appears to be tighter; (iii) expression of endothelial vascular growth factor (VEGF) and of receptors against von Willebrand factor is higher in the endotheliocytes of arteries [5]. Remarkably, large veins versus arteries have a greater capacity to trigger and sustain an inflammatory response. Likewise, in veins the formation of thrombus is much faster than in arteries due to lowered blood flow, and the red blood thrombus does not need von Willebrand factor. 

Despite the fact that both arteries and veins express a lot of common markers, the genes families inherent to endotheliocytes of arteries and veins are not totally similar. Arterial endotheliocytes express more opulently ephrinB2 gen, but in veins predominates EphB4 gen [6]. Conceptually is admitted that hemodynamic stress of the blood flow might change the phenotype and morpho-functional support of vessel behavior regardless a certain identical embryonal pattern. Thus, the increased blood flux can induce an arterial phenotype of venous endothelial cells. 

Noteworthy, the VE injury associated by various models of dysfunction becomes an important pathogenic pillar of many homeostasis disorders, which in veins are mostly manifested by high risk of thrombus formation (e.g. deep venous thrombosis), and in arteries by vascular remodeling developing in a field of atherogenic event and artery reactivity disturbances. Artery endothelial dysfunction is viewed as a pivotal tool of so dangerous cardiovascular disorders like acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and arterial hypertension. Endothelial damage associating the coronary angioplasty triggers the process of in-stent re-stenosis qualified as a pattern of pathological vascular remodeling resulting in the angioplasty benefic lost. 

Taken together these arrangements underline the real importance of early endothelial dysfunction detection for prediction of cardiovascular homeostasis impairment as well as for disentangle of main therapeutic targets. Therefore, a multi-marker strategy or multi-marker panel is applied as a feasible algorithm containing markers which are referring to most important pathogenic interfaces of the endothelial dysfunction and its imminent pathological consequences. 

Material and methods

In order to build this review article, the searching of needed references concerning actuality, specificity, relevance and matching to article goal was projected on databases of PubMed, MEDLINE Google Scholar and Cochrane with the depth of the relating up to the year 2000. The found articles were structured in regard to main objectives, comprehensively analyzed, and the principal coagulated entities have been critically exposed.

Results and discussions

Conceptually the multi-marker algorithm is built from a puzzle of various pathogenic mechanisms leading to VE injury and dysfunction whose most important expression is NO lack. In arteries these phenomena are closely linked to atherogenesis and inducing endogenous and exogenous factors. Leader mechanisms taken as intelligible objectives for seeking feasible markers and predictors of VE dysfunction and its repercussions are inflammation, oxidative stress, endothelial reendothelization potency, decreases expression and activity of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS), smooth vascular myocyte migration and proliferation control disturbance, hemostasis disorders, etc. 

Inflammation and more important circulating markers 

Chronic or low-grade systemic inflammation or subclinical inflammation is considered as a key factor leading to VE impairment and dysfunction, beyond its direct action on atherogenesis progressing. Contemporary concept corroborates chronic inflammation as a sustained elevation of circulating cytokines released by a diversity group of cells, including adipocytes, which promotes an impact on remote endothelial cells. Classical canon underlines obesity, metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance as most important pathological entities leading to subclinical inflammation even in both relatively young people and apparently healthy adults [7-9]. 

Pathophysiological interface of inflammation induced VE disorders is very complex, multi hierarchical and interdependent [10, 11]. Among most important mechanisms should be revealed:

  • Inflammatory cytokines induced endothelial cell apoptosis and pyroptosis.

  • Activation of oxidative stress.

  • Reduced expression and activity of eNOS.

  • Diminution of tetrahydrobiopterin, a cofactor of NO synthesis by endothelial cells from L-arginine.

  • Increased activity of arginase, which takes supplementary amounts of L-arginine from eNOS-citrulline cycle and converts this amino acid in ornithine cycle leading to urea formation [12]. Remarkably, arginase II expression in mitochondrial apparatus is augmented by inflammatory cytokines released by proinflammatory macrophages type 1 (M1). On the other hand, excess of polyamines released in ornithine cycle triggered by arginase are able to increase production of asymmetric dimethylarginine which inhibits activity of eNOS [13].

Inflammation boosting resulting in endothelial dysfunction is higher in arterial vessels due to increased risk of disturbed blood flow. Contrarily, laminar blood flow like flow in veins is not a so strong factor capable to trigger inflammatory response, and as consequence it means a lowered hazard for excessive synthesis of ROS, reactive oxygen species (figure 1). 

Изображение выглядит как текст, снимок экрана, диаграмма, Графика

Автоматически созданное описание

Fig 1. Mutual relation ROS-inflammation is sustained by disturbed blood flow [11]

 

            Finally, inflammation either directly or indirectly (thereby of NO deficiency) exacerbates the process of atherosclerosis a one of crucial supports responsible for VE damage and dysfunction. Inflammation also is a factor promoting vascular ageing either of arteries or veins which strongly correlates with VE dysfunction severity [14]. 

            Accordingly, the assessment of inflammatory markers is an important diagnostical tool of VE dysfunction and respectively a prediction of inherent cardiovascular disorders. The most frequently used marker of inflammation and VE dysfunction is high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP), which compresses a large amount of evidence. Likewise, hsCRP is considered a key predictor of coronary and heart failure risk [15, 16]. To note in this regard that the serum level of hsCRP is taken as cardiovascular risk stratification such as the levels of <1 mg/L, 1–3 mg/L, and >3 mg/L should be interpreted respectively as low, moderate, and high vascular risk, respectively, based on a large number of population studies [17]. Must be mentioned that elevation of serum hsCRP level more than 15 mg/L should be interpreted as a presence of pathogen induced inflammatory processes. Furthermore, moderate increased hsCRP levels should be taken into consideration in cases when where are other cardiovascular risk factors like arterial hypertension, diabetes, obesity, smoking, dyslipidemia, stress, etc. [18]. 

            The CRP role in endothelium damage and dysfunction is well documented in an enormous number of clinical and experimental studies and is based on certain mechanisms. 

First, CRP is early and tightly involved in triggering and progressing of atherosclerosis in arteries and thrombosis in veins (figure 2). 

 

Изображение выглядит как текст, мультфильм

Автоматически созданное описание

Fig 2. Synoptic mechanisms of pentameric CRP (pCRP) and monomeric CRP (mCRP) involvement in the processes of atherosclerosis in arteries and thrombosis in veins [19].

 

            The main mechanisms of CRP induced inflammation driving VE dysfunction are linked to complement activation, stimulation of foam cell formation and production of ROS and cytokines, circulating leukocyte recruitment, stimulation of platelet adhesion and aggregation, inhibition of eNOS and NO diminution [19, 20]. More than that, the amount of CRP found in atherogenic plaque robustly correlates with intensity of inflammatory response, endothelial dysfunction degree and risk power regarding acute coronary syndrome. In regard to the ratio of monomeric/pentameric CRP forms in veins and arteries is to underline the role of mechanical and physical characteristics of the blood stream which determine the activity of pentamer conversion in monomer as well as the enzyme activity of the vascular locus. It is considered that in arteries the concentration of monomeric CRP is bigger than in veins, primarily due to a stronger blood stream, and a higher proteolytic enzyme concentration especially in the region of atherosclerotic injury [21]. It is still unknown the precise mechanisms explaining more aggressive pro-atherosclerotic action of CRP monomers in comparison to CRP pentamers although both structural patterns activate the same pathophysiological events, such as complement activation, platelet and leukocyte adhesion, endothelial cells damage [22]. Moreover, in the arterial endothelial zones of injury the concentration of white blood cells is higher compared to veins, a fact which should be taken into consideration, because according to some opinions, lymphocytes can synthesize CRP monomers [23]. Respectively, the CRP-linked and mediated inflammatory process is significantly more active in arteries than veins. Endothelial inflammation is manifested by increased expression of phospholipase A2 which facilitates the pCRP entering in the liposomes of cell membrane (e.g., endotheliocytes, macrophages, smooth muscle cells) where it is exposed to a process of dissociation in partly due to an acidic microenvironment. So, in a case of a certain suspected risk to endothelial dysfunction both pCRP and mCRP circulating levels are diagnostically more important for arteries. 

Second, CRP increases expression of monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP-1), as well as of selectins in endothelium [24]. These events facilitate the monocyte and neutrophil traffic through endothelial layer. The trapped white cells trigger the process of smooth myocytes migration and proliferation not only in arteries, but also in veins, defined as vein wall remodeling [25]. It is sustained by extracellular matrix (ECM) excessive degradation and synthesis under the action of fibroblasts and ECM metalloproteinases. Noteworthy that under statins action, the serum MCP-1 content decreased and it resulted in improvement varicose vein remodeling [26]. Likewise, it is a corroborated suggestion that susceptibility of the vein ECM to proinflammatory agents’ action is linked to some proteomic and genetic disorders, which justifies the application of multi-marker panel in order to unravel the real predictors of chronic venous disease [27].

Third, CRP decreases activity of HDL capacity to take cholesterol from foam cells leading to atherogenic phenomenon boosting. On the other hand, HDL markedly reduces the proinflammatory activity of CRP, and therefore lipid profile improvement manifested by LDL decrease and HDL raise confines the pathogenic approach of CRP in inflammation induced VE damage and dysfunction [28]. This effect is especially suitable in arteries and represents a pillar of lipid-lowering therapy. 

Another remarkable marker of inflammation and predictor of VE dysfunction is tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α). TNF-α is considered as a pivotal proinflammatory marker whose expression is dependent on activity of 2 transcription factors: nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kB) and nuclear factor of activated T lymphocytes (NFAT) which provide the signals from membrane Toll-like receptors to nuclear DNA. The strong contribution of TNF-α in endothelial inflammation and dysfunction was confirmed in a lot of clinical and fundamental studies. Especially are the emphasized results showing that intra-arterial TNF-α infusion in healthy volunteers resulted in acute vascular inflammation associated with impaired endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation [29]. 

A few important detrimental effects of TNF-α are recognized as (figure 3): 

  • Increased activity of endothelial membrane NADPH-oxidase leading to excessive formation of superoxide anion which neutralizes the NO by accumulation of peroxynitrite (ONOO-), a radical able to constrict arteries and exacerbate atherosclerotic process.

  • Inhibition of cytochrome 450 resulting in lowering of epoxyeicosatrienoic acids (EETs) formation from arachidonic acid, which is able to relax arteries by hyperpolarization mechanism.

  • Decreased expression of eNOS. 

 

Изображение выглядит как текст, снимок экрана, диаграмма, Шрифт

Автоматически созданное описание

Fig 3. Mechanisms of TNF-α induced endothelial dysfunction [29].

AA – arachidonic acid; EDHF – endothelial derived hyperpolarizing factor; L-Arg -L arginine.

 

            The circulating TNF-α levels directly correlate with severity of endothelial dysfunction in both arteries and veins. In some cases, overexpression of TNF-α is linked to genetic disorders found in autoimmune diseases (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus) associated with VE dysfunction worsening [30]. TNF-α stimulates expression of endothelial receptor LOX-1 which boosts sequestration of oxiLDL molecules from blood in order to build the atherogenic plaque in arteries. LOX-1 activation also leads to increased expression of NF-kB and arginase2. The last reduces NO formation because consumes excessively L-arginase in the ornithine cycle. 

            The impact of low grade of inflammation or subclinical inflammation often found in diverse metabolic disorders (e.g., obesity, diabetes, insulin resistance syndrome) on VE even in young persons is provided via elevated circulating levels of TNF-α. Impairment of microcirculation (cerebral, cardiac), a system of vascular network which encompasses resistant vessels such as prearterioles, arterioles and capillaries, having a risk power for stroke and acute myocardial infarction, is strongly linked to TNF-α elevation [31]. Being directly and actively involved in the ROS formation, TNF-α leads to endothelial cell activation in order to release endothelin 1 (ET-1) which is considered as one of most potent natural vasoconstricting agents. So, collectively TNF-α, ROS and ET-1 are important pathogenic factors acting together and able to induce VE dysfunction and promote its consequences. More than that, TNF-α increases expression of ET-1 receptor in smooth arterial myocytes (i.e., types ETA and ETB), thus tightly contributing to artery remodeling, especially resistant arteries [32]. Stimulation of ET-1 generation by TNF-α is mediated by c-Jun N-terminal kinase pathway, which is also a mechanism of ROS release. Perivascular adipose tissue is influenced via inherent adipokines the rate of TNF-α expression. It has been proven that adiponectin decrease provides TNF-α expression, but in excess leptin and resistin, in contrary, stimulates expression. The substance P can decrease in natural conditions the TNF-α impact on VE thereby a mechanism linked to modulation of proteinkinase B (Akt) triggering eNOS activity [33]. 

            Recent studies have shown that diverse families of micro-ARN (miR) can have a dichotomic manner of VE regulation. In this regard is important the action of mir-29a-3p manifested by decrease of TNF-α receptor expression, and as consequence the TNF-α induced activation of adhesive molecules, such as E-selectin and ICAM-1 (intercellular adhesion molecule) and VACM-1 (vascular adhesion molecule), hence playing a role of natural VE protector and a mechanism counteracting endothelial dysfunction worsening [34]. 

            The role of TNF-α in the pathogenesis of inflammation induced and assisted endothelial injury is quite well documented [35]. However, the predictive power of TNF-α regarding early endothelial dysfunction is better studied and known for arterial bed.

            Both main markers of VE dysfunction, CRP and TNF-α, are conceptually strongly linked to another proinflammatory marker, IL-6. Inflammation, oxidative stress, and Ang II stimulate the IL-6 expression in veins and arteries wall. Being a multifunctional cytokine, IL-6 acts on diverse cells (endotheliocytes, myocytes, adipocytes, monocytes, and cardiomyocytes) in both endocrine and paracrine pathways. Like CRP, IL-6 can be synthesized locally, in the atherosclerotic plaque, and its level positively correlates with expression of LOX-1 receptors and pathological pattern of vascular remodeling. IL-6 receptor is found in two arrangements [36]: 

  1. As a membrane receptor without intrinsic kinase activity and with low affinity at the cell surface.

  2. As a gp130 transmembrane site having intrinsic tyrosine kinase activity able to bind the circulating complex acting as a ligand: IL-6+ soluble IL-6 receptor. 

Activation of both markers leads to activation of STAT-1 and STAT-3 (signal transducer and activator of transcription) and consequently to nuclear DNA activation. The gp130 is expressed ubiquitously, but membrane IL-6 receptor – selectively, in dependence of the cell type. 

In a comparative analysis of IL-6 role vis-à-vis of venous and arterial endothelial dysfunction it is important to underline 2 distinct traits. The first, vascular wall capacity to release IL-6 is higher in arteries. Second, the gp130 expression level in veins is lowered. 

Among pleiotropic effects of IL-6 should be highlighted the following actions in regard to its role in VE dysfunction [37, 38]: 

  • augments the detrimental action of TNF-α and CRP on VE;

  • increases production of ROS;

  • stimulates expression of chemokines;

  • elevates the level of plasmin activator inhibitor;

  • stimulates synthesis of active-phase proteins by liver (e.g., fibrinogen, ceruloplasmin); 

  • increases expression of adhesive molecules and facilitates the trans-endothelial traffic of white blood cells;

  • triggers the migration and proliferation of endothelial cells and smooth vascular muscle cells; 

  • activates the ECM fibroblasts and promotes the vascular remodeling.

According to IL-6 intake in the venous endothelial dysfunction the majority of evidence indicate that in diverse patterns of vein remodeling the circulating IL-6 level is significantly elevated and robustly correlates with the serum amount of IL-8, TNF-α and MCP-1 [39, 40]. Anyway, still the amplitude of diagnostic and pathophysiological relevance of the main proinflammatory markers such as CRP, TNF-α and IL-6 in veins remains less appreciated in comparison with arteries. First and foremost, deep venous thrombosis remains the principal venous pathology requesting monitoring of inflammation markers as predictors of endothelial dysfunction and inherent repercussions. 

Markers of endothelial lesion and reendothelization 

Endothelial lesion is a continuous process triggered by various pathologic factors such as: ROS, inflammation mediators, shear-stress, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, hyperhomocisteinemia etc. Many comorbidities (e.g., arterial hypertension, diabetes, autoimmune diseases) worsen endothelial injury leading to a progressive decline of VE dysfunction. The most important markers of endothelial lesion are endothelial microparticles (EMP), endothelial exosomes which derive from special vesicles erupted from endothelial cell membrane and endothelial apoptotic bodies [41-43]. The circulating level of EMP positively correlates with the degree of endothelial injury especially in arterial bed, atherosclerotic process activity as well as risk of acute vascular accidents like acute myocardial infarction and stroke. Likewise, elevated EMP level is associated with higher serum amounts of CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, MCP-1, and diabetes induced VE damage [44]. Hyperhomocysteinemia, smoking and hypodynamic lifestyle are often associated with raised EMP and free endotheliocyte circulation that indicates on endothelial layer injury and endothelial inflammation because the level of phospholipase A2 is also increased. 

In the venous system, the pathophysiological significance of EMP is rather linked to procoagulant activity and risk of thrombosis, and this marker predicts endothelial cell senescence and functional weariness [45]. To note in this context that EMP increases directly and indirectly expression of selectins, VACM-1 and ICAM-1, activates platelets and monocytes, increases release of tissue factor from endotheliocytes, thrombocytes and mononuclear cells. These procoagulant events are also associated with elevated levels of thromboxane A2 (TxA2), ET-1, ROS and peroxynitrite, growth factors and plasminogen activator inhibitor. So, EMP is an early predictor of vein thrombosis, and obviously this marker should be assessed in association with other biomarkers referring to coagulant, anticoagulant and fibrinolysis systems feasibility.

The process of reendothelization is a crucial phenomenon aiming substitution of either damaged cells or senescence cells by new endotheliocytes. In regard to renewing of senescence cells population, should be emphasized that both endotheliocytes and smooth vascular myocytes demonstrate an advanced statement of senescence in the boosted atherosclerotic process [46]. Endothelial senescence and damage lead to diminution of tetrahydrobiopterin, a cofactor of NO synthesis, and respectively a predictor of VE dysfunction. Therefore, tetrahydrobiopterin became a reliable marker of early VE dysfunction and atherosclerosis progression [47]. 

Basically, reendothelization is realized and emphasized by following paramount markers: VEGF, angiopoietins, and endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs). 

VEGF is considered a strong endotheliocyte mitogen and angiogenic factor. In vitro studies have demonstrated that VEGF stimulates the growth of arterial, venous, and lymphatic endotheliocytes which are forming a new capillary network. Hypoxia, ischemia, and oxidative stress are main factors triggering expression of VEGF, which is underlined also as vasoprotector factor due to its antiapoptotic effects derived from activation of Bcl-2 proteins. Mechanical stress of VE induced by diverse maneuvers of angioplasty damages endothelial cells and stimulates release of VEGF. Nitric oxide and eNOS play an important role in the VEGF induced angiogenesis [48]. Remarkably, VEGF induces vasodilation in a dose dependent manner, and this effect is fought to be mediated by prostacyclin. Two types of receptors mediate the large spectrum of VEFG effects: R1 and R2. The VEGF-R2 receptor is expressed on arterial and venous vasculature, being involved in control of vasodilation, atherosclerosis, cell migration and proliferation [49]. 

VEGF-R1 receptor is mostly found as a soluble receptor capable to bind the circulating VEGF and the affinity of receptor against specific ligand is 10-fold higher versus VEGF-R2. However, the kinase activity triggered by via VEGF-R1 is 10-fold weaker [50]. In contrast to VEGF-R2, VEGF-R1 does nor mediate angiogenesis in embryonal tissue. In adulthood it is expressed in both endothelial cells and macrophages and worsens the atherosclerotic process. 

Accumulated data suggest that VEGF is a predictor of arterial wall remodeling, and its elevated level is well proven in patients with arterial hypertension and type 2 diabetes [51]. The authentic role of VEGF in reendothelization was confirmed in vivo by administration of an antibody neutralizing this growth factor after angioplasty induced vascular injury, which led to VE recovery annihilation.  It has been deduced that released VEGF from damaged endothelial cells in the blood promotes the function of EPCs, which are sequestrated from bone marrow under action of this growth factor. Increased production of endogenous NO after an adequate reendothelization realized basically by EPCs, decrease expression and activity of VEGF. More than that, exogenous NO released from nitrite donors reduces the activity of reendothelization in vivo due to decrease of VEGF level as well as level of APCs. Interestingly, carbon monoxide, another endothelial derived factor, acts unlike NO, contributing to VEGF expression increase thereby hypoxia inducible factor. Finally, VEGF being appreciated as a growth factor expressed not only by endotheliocytes (e.g., by macrophages, platelets, keratinocytes, renal mesangial cells) plays a certain role in other functions besides reendothelization, such as: hematopoiesis, wound healing, bone tissue synthesis. To be noted in this context that tumor cells also are capable to express VEGF, and angiogenesis becomes a pathogenic factor facilitating tumor growing and metastasis [52]. Likewise, use of the blockers of VEGF receptors led to a suppressing effect on tumor growth and lowered risk of tumor metastasis. 

Thus, EPCs are proven as an important tool triggering and sustaining reendothelization because they are capable to differentiate into endothelial cells and hence provide phenomenon of new blood vessels formation. Therefore, EPCs are often named as circulating angiogenic cells. Mobilization of EPCs from bone marrow is realized not only by VEGF, but other factors are also available, such as ECM  metalloproteinase 9 and stromal cell-derived factor 1. Also, EPCs can secrete some paracrine factors, such as IL-8 and stromal cell-derived factor 1. Hypoxia and ischemia are factors that mobilize EPCs in blood flow resulting in their migration toward the zone of endothelial injury where they proliferate, and differentiate into mature endothelium, thereby leading to reendothelialization and neovascularization [53, 54]. Being injected intravenously EPCs can reach the infarcted region within 48 hours.

Decreased levels of EPCs or their functional disability are strong predictors of endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular disease as well [55]. Lower levels of EPCs are associated with a weaker process of reendothelization even when the circulating level of VEGF is quite high. It is a well proven fact, that low levels of EPCs are accompanied by decreased production of NO and vascular reactivity impairment. Weak sequestration of EPCs from bone marrow augments VE dysfunction and accelerates the progression of cardiovascular disorders. Many cardiovascular risk factors confine the activity of EPCs recruitment and their home in the zone of VE injury, such as hyperglycemia, hypercholesterolemia, hyperhomocysteinemia, low grade inflammation, leukocytosis, oxidative stress, etc. Therefore, for a better understanding of real pathogenic interface of VE dysfunction, EPCs should be assessed together and correlatively with a lot of other markers and risk factors of vascular, especially arterial damage. Noteworthy, the level of circulating EPCs is recognized as an independent predictor of atherosclerosis progression and suspected disorders of artery remodeling and reactivity [56-58]. 

Nowadays the serum concentration of EPCs is viewed as an important diagnostic marker as well as a therapeutic target of cardiovascular disorders associated with VE dysfunction. Intracoronary infusion of EPCs lead to reduced myocardial infarction zone and to improvement of myocardial and ECM remodeling in post-infarction period. 

In this regard it is important the opinion of K. Lenk et al. (2021) who suggest that EPCs are a one of key tools for providing physical exercise benefits on atherosclerosis and coronary disorders [59]. Physical activity maintains the structural integrity of VE regardless of any risk factors action, and in case of endothelium alteration, the level of EPCs is higher and their involvement in vascular repair becomes more efficient. 

Regarding some differences of EPCs role in arteries and veins, there is no conclusive data. Nevertheless, could be relevant hypothesis that the EPCs role in both arterial and venous endothelium repair is the same. 

Nowadays, a new marker of reendothelization is angiopoietin which belongs to group of growth factors. Two most important families of angiopoietin are known: Ang-1 and Ang-2, which are natural ligands of the Tie-1 and, respectively, Tie-2 receptors tyrosine kinase, which are expressed primarily on endothelial cells and early hematopoietic cells [60, 61]. 

Ang-1 acts as a potent angiogenic growth factor, but Ang-2 plays an important role in various physiological processes and its impairment is inherent to a lot of homeostasis disorders, including for the lymphatic system.

Tie-2 receptor is abundantly expressed in endothelium, especially of arteries. Likewise, vascular fibroblasts can express Tie-2 receptors, whose attribution is considered to be tightly linked to vascular injury repair. Therefore, this receptor is considered as atheroprotective in arterial endothelium [62]. So, both angiopoietins fulfill a lot of suitable functions, such as: adhesion and survival of endothelial cells, augmentation of EPCs action vis-à-vis of endothelium repair, reendothelization and angiogenesis from new formed capillaries. However, the authentic equilibrium between Ang-1 and Ang-2 in postnatal vascular morphology and physiology control is still not well established. Most hypotheses state that Ang-1 acts in a paracrine agonistic manner inducing Tie-2 phosphorylation and subsequent vessel stabilization. In contrast, Ang-2 is produced by endothelial cells and acts as an autocrine antagonist of Ang-1-mediated Tie2 activation. Conceptually is important that Ang-2 blunts the action of proinflammatory cytokines on vascular endothelium and therefore prevents and mitigates the VE injury and remodeling. Lastly, Ang-2 and EPCs action on VE might be boosted by TGF-beta (transforming growth factor) whose signal is received by a special endothelial receptor, endoglin (membrane glycoprotein) whose activation promotes the neoformation of capillaries and integrity of vessel walls, either in the embryo or postnatal life [63]. 

Together with VEGF, angiopoietins could stimulate angiogenesis induced tumor metastasis, and respectively are depicted as targets of therapy, especially concerning the Ang-2. More data is needed in order to highlight physiological and pathophysiological entities of these growth factors regarding VE dysfunction. 

Markers of VE dysfunction in connection to hemostasis disorders 

Vascular endothelium dysfunction is associated with severe hemostasis disorders manifested finally by a prothrombotic state induction. Accordingly, VE dysfunction becomes a condition of prothrombotic risk, but at the same time the formed thrombi comprise a pathogenic interface for DE dysfunction exacerbation. Therefore, inherent markers of hemostasis disorders should be important and significant predictors of VE dysfunction severity and its prognostic outcomes. 

Basically, prothrombotic state is a result of either overactivation of coagulation system or impairment of anticoagulant processes. Frequently these factors act together. Fibrinolytic activity of the blood also plays a notable role because can ensure in time the resolution of fibrin thrombus. Endothelium incompetency in the field of hemostasis control is emphasized as following main entities:

  • Discovery of the integrins receptors expressed by subendothelial collagen fibers.

  • Platelet activation and increase of its adhesive and aggregation receptors. 

  • Increased release of von Willebrand factor (vWF).

  • Excessive accumulation of the tissue factor released in partly from damaged endotheliocytes. 

  • Decreased expression of endothelial receptors playing a crucial role in the anticoagulant protein C activation.

  • Diminution of the anti-thrombin III level. 

  • Reduced NO and prostacyclin production. 

The earliest consequences of VE lesion and dysfunction in regard to hemostasis control are elevated circulating level of vWF, antithrombin III and incompetence of anticoagulant tandem protein C-protein S. Von Willebrand factor, a pentameric glycoprotein, is mainly synthesized by endothelial cells (megakariocytes also express vWF) and is stored in Weibel-Palade bodies and a-granules respectively of endotheliocytes. Normally the circulating level of vWF is linked to ABO blood groups and other genetic arrangements. Non-genetic background of vWF plasma level changes is determined by age, gender, inflammation, oxidative stress, and surely by endothelial cell integrity in either arteries or veins. Most important hemostatic functions of vWF are driven by: (i) stabilization of the factor VIII in the circulation because vWF serves as its plasma carrier, and (ii) boosting of platelet adhesion to vascular wall and platelet aggregation, respectively. 

Majority of pathologic states associated with vascular endothelium injury and dysfunction demonstrate elevated circulating levels of vWF [64-66]. Increased plasma vWF concentration means a risk for prothrombotic state activation leading to thrombi formation in arteries of veins (so, white and red thrombi). Most important conceptual and practice question remains as: does the vWF has a more decisive role in thrombus formation in arteries or in veins? 

Solitary narrations indicate the importance of discovery of all active sites of vWF pentamer in the blood flow in order to achieve maximal hemostatic functions [67-69]. This is possible in an arterial rapid and intense blood flow comparable to the slow flow in. So, the predictive power of increased plasma level of vWF concerning risk of thrombus formation is obvious in arteries. In regard to vWF role in venous thrombus it is linked to lowered polymer degradation and consequently less fully discovery of active sites of glycoprotein needed for factor VIII binding due to weak blood flow in veins [70]. 

Another hemostatic factor linked to endothelial availability is antithrombin III (AT-III), recognized as an endogenous serine protease inhibitor (glycoprotein consisting of 432 amino acid residues), thus of thrombin. Endothelial cells injury leads to decreased release of AT-III resulting in a lowered capacity of thrombin inactivation of the blood. Likewise, AT-III also inhibits other factors of coagulation system, such as IX, X, XI and XII [71]. 

So, blood levels of AT-III predicts VE dysfunction and risk of serious cardiovascular diseases like acute myocardial infarction and stroke [72]. 

Finally, anticoagulant protein C is a key antithrombotic factor, but its functional feasibility is closely linked to endothelial receptor (type 1 transmembrane glycoprotein) needed for protein C activation. Therefore, even the normal or elevated circulating levels of protein C could be inefficient to prevent thrombus formation if due to endothelial damage its activation is compromised. However, there are interesting approaches to study the predictive value of soluble endothelial receptors to protein C. Remarkably, in the blood stream this receptor binds to circulating protein C, but this does not result in anticoagulant factor activation, but in contrary leads to its inhibition due to lost ability to inhibit factor Va [73]. 

Thus, increased level of soluble endothelial receptor of protein C could be a reliable marker of anticoagulant capacity fall due to protein C misfunctioning, and respectively a predictor of prothrombotic state activation in both arteries and veins. 

Conclusions

  1. The multi-marker panel of endothelial dysfunction is a key opportunity to identify the markers referring to main pathogenic mechanisms, such as inflammation, reendothelization and hemostasis disorders having a reliable early prediction for arterial and venous endothelial dysfunction. 

  2. Although majority of markers have a same predictive value of endothelial dysfunction in both arteries and veins, the circulating levels of CRP and vWF are more important in regard to arteries because here depolymerization activity of these pentamers is higher leading to pathogenic mission augmentation concerning vascular remodeling and prothrombosis. 

  3. The circulating level of protein C is not a reliable marker of endothelial dysfunction induced risk of thrombosis. However, the elevation of its soluble endothelial receptor could predict lower anticoagulant activity of protein C due to the loss of capacity to inactivate factor Va. 

Competing interests

None declared. 

Authors’ contribution

Both authors contributed equally to the literature searching, conceptual highlighting of the material as well as writing of the manuscript. The authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Authors’ ORCID IDs

Victor Ojog – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2386-6654

Svetlana Lozovanu – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5777-1805&nbsp;

References 

  1. Stanek A, Fazeli B, Bartus S, et al. The role of endothelium in physiological and pathological states: new data. BioMed Res Int. 2018;2018:1098039. doi: 10.1155/2018/1098039. 

  2. Bkaily G, Jacques D. Morphological and functional remodeling of vascular endothelium in cardiovascular diseases. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;234(3):1998. doi: 10.3390/ijms24031998.

  3. Campinho P, Vilfan A, Vermot J. Blood flow forces in shaping the vascular system: a focus on endothelial cell behavior. Front Physiol. 2020;11:552. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00552

  4. Heil M, Eitenmuller I, Schmitz-Rixen T, Schaper W. Arteriogenesis versus angiogenesis: similarities and differences. J Cell Mol Med. 2006;10(1):45-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2006.tb00290.x.

  5. Niklason L, Dai G. Arterial venous differentiation for vascular bioengineering. Ann Rev Biomed Eng. 2018;20:431-447. doi: 10.1146/annurev-bioeng-062117-121231

  6. Wolf K, Hu H, Isaji T, Dardic A. Molecular identity of arteries, veins, and lymphatics. J Vasc Surg. 2019;69:253-262. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.06.195.

  7. Skrzypczyk P, Ozimel A, Ofiara A, et al. Markers of endothelial injury and subclinical inflammation in children and adolescents with primary hypertension. Centr Eur J Immunol. 2019;44(3):253-261. doi: 10.5114/ceji.2019.89597.

  8. Virdis A, Masi S, Colucci R, et al. Microvascular endothelial dysfunction in patients with obesity. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2019;21:32. doi: 10.1007/s11906-019-0930-2.

  9. Cowan S, Leeming E, Sinclair A, et al. Effect of whole foods and dietary patterns on markers of subclinical inflammation in weight-stable overweight and obese adults: a systematic review. Nutr Rev. 2019;78(1):19-38. doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuz030.

  10. Theofilis P, Sagris M, Oikolomou E, et al. Inflammatory mechanisms contributing to endothelial dysfunction. Biomedicines. 2021;9(7):781. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines9070781.

  11. Wang L, Cheng C, Yi M, et al. Targeting endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. J Mol Cell Cardiol. 2022;168:58-67. doi: 10.1016/j.yjmcc.2022.04.011.

  12. Rath M, Muller I, Kropf P, et al. Metabolism via arginase or nitric oxide synthase: two competing arginine pathways in macrophages. Front Immunol. 2014;5:532. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00532.

  13. Mangoni A, Tommasi S, Sotgia S, et al. Asymmetric dimethylarginine: a key player in the pathophysiology of endothelial dysfunction, vascular inflammation, and atherosclerosis in rheumatoid arthritis? Curr Pharm Des. 2021;27(18):2131-40. doi: 10.2174/1381612827666210106144247.

  14. Lee MKY, Vanhoutte PM. Inflammation and endothelial dysfunction with aging. In: Dauphinee S, Karsan A, editors. Endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. Basel: Springer; 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0346-0168-9_11.

  15. Maio R, Perticone M, Suraci E, et al. Endothelial dysfunction and C-reactive protein predict the incidence of heart failure in hypertensive patients. ESC Heart Fail. 2021;8(1):399-407. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.13088

  16. Medina-Leyte DJ, Zepeda-Garcia O, Domingues-Perez M, et al. Endothelial dysfunction, inflammation and coronary artery disease: potential biomarkers and promising therapeutical approaches. Int J Med Sci. 2021;22(8):3850. doi: 10.3390/ijms22083850.

  17. Pearson TA, Mensah GA, Alexander RW, et al. Markers of inflammation and cardiovascular disease: application to clinical and public health practice: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2003;107(3):499-511. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000052939.59093.45.

  18. Lee HA, Choi EJ, Park B, et al. The association between metabolic components and markers of inflammatory and endothelial dysfunction in adolescents, based on the Ewha Birth and Growth Cohort Study. PLoS One. 2020;15(5):e0233469 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233469.

  19. Badimon L, Pena E, Arderiu G, et al. C-reactive protein in atherothrombosis and angiogenesis. Front Immunol. 2018;9:430. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00430.

  20. Paffen E, Moniek P. C-reactive protein in atherosclerosis: a causal factor? Cardiovasc Res. 2006;71(1):30-39. doi: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2006.03.004

  21. Melnikov I, Kozlov S, Saburova O, et al. Monomeric C-reactive protein in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: advances and perspectives. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(3):2079. doi: 10.3390/ijms24032079

  22. McFadyen J, Kiefer J, Braig D, et al. Dissociation of C-reactive protein localizes and amplifies inflammation: evidence for a direct biological role of C-reactive protein and its conformational changes. Front Immunol. 2018;9:1351. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01351

  23. Kuta AE, Baum LL. C-reactive protein is produced by a small number of normal human peripheral blood lymphocytes. J Exp Med. 1986;164(1):321-326. doi: 10.1084/jem.164.1.321.

  24. Fu Y, Wu Y, Liu E. C-reactive protein and cardiovascular disease: from animal studies to the clinic (Review). Exp Ther Med. 2020;2(2):1211-1219. doi: 10.3892/etm.2020.8840

  25. Zolotukhin I, Golovanova O, Efremova O, et al. Monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 plasma concentration in blood from varicose veins decreases under venoactive drug treatment. Int Angiol. 2022;41(6):457-463. doi: 10.23736/S0392-9590.22.04940-9. 

  26. Eschrich J, meyer R, Kuk H, et al. Varicose remodeling of veins is suppressed by 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(2):e002405. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002405. 

  27. Costa D, Andreucci M, Ielapi N, et al. Molecular determinants of chronic venous disease: a comprehensive review. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24(3):1928. doi: 10.3390/ijms24031928.

  28. Wadham C, Albanese N, Wang L, et al. High-density lipoproteins neutralize C-reactive protein proinflammatory activity. Circulation. 2004;109(17):2116-2122. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000127419.45975.26. 

  29. Zhang H, Park Y, Wu J, et al. Role of TNF-α in vascular dysfunction. Clin Sci. 2009;116(3):219-230. doi: 10.1042/CS20080196. 

  30. Akhmedov A, Crucet M, Simic B, et al. TNFα induces endothelial dysfunction in rheumatoid arthritis via LOX-1 and arginase 2: reversal by monoclonal TNFα antibodies. Cardiovascular Research.  2022;118(1):254-266. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvab005

  31. Virdis A, Colucci R, Bernardini N, et al. Microvascular endothelial dysfunction in human obesity: role of TNF-α. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol. 2019;104(2):341-348. doi: 10.1210/jc.2018-00512

  32. Virdis A, Duranti E, Rossi C, et al. Tumour necrosis factor-alpha participates on the endothelin-1/nitric oxide imbalance in small arteries from obese patients: role of perivascular adipose tissue. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(13):784-794. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu072

  33. Piao J, Hong H, Son Y. Substance P ameliorates tumor necrosis factor-alpha-induced endothelial cell dysfunction by regulating eNOS expression in vitro. Microcirculation. 2018;25(3):e12443. doi: 10.1111/micc.12443.

  34. Deng X, Chu X, Wang P, et al. MicroRNA-29a-3p reduces TNFa-induced endothelial dysfunction by targeting tumor necrosis factor receptor 1. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2019;18:903-915. doi: 10.1016/j.omtn.2019.10.014.

  35. Castro-Ferreira R, Cardoso R, Leite-Moreira A, Mansilha A. The role of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in chronic venous diseases. J Vasc Surg Vasc Lymphat Dis. 2018;6(4):552-553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.05.013.

  36. Hou T, Tieu B, Ray S, et al. Roles of IL-6-gp130 signaling in vascular inflammation. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2008;4(3):179-192. doi: 10.2174/157340308785160570.

  37. Kang S, Kishimoto T. Interplay between interleukin-6 signaling and the vascular endothelium in cytokine storms. Exp Mol Med. 2021;53(7):1116-1123. doi: 10.1038/s12276-021-00649-0.

  38. Su J, Luo M, Liang N, et al. Interleukin-6: a novel target for cardio-cerebrovascular diseases. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:745061. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.745061.

  39. Poredos P, Spirkoska A, Rucigaj T, et al. Do blood constituents in varicose veins differ from the systemic blood constituents? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;50(2):250-256. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2015.04.031. 

  40. Lattimer C, Kalodiki E, Geroulakos G et al. Are inflammatory biomarkers increased in varicose vein blood? Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2016;22(7):656-664. doi: 10.1177/1076029616645330. 

  41. Deng F, Wang S, Zhang L. Endothelial microparticles act as novel diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers of circulatory hypoxia‐related diseases: a literature review. J Cell Mol Med. 2017;21(9):1698-1710. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.13125.

  42. Nik I, Abdul Rahman R, Azlan M, et al. Endothelial microparticles as potential biomarkers in the assessment of endothelial dysfunction in hypercholesterolemia. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022;58(6):824. doi: 10.3390/medicina58060824.

  43. Zhang J. Biomarkers of endothelial activation and dysfunction in cardiovascular diseases. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2022;23(2):73. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2302073.

  44. Marei I, Chidiac O, Thomas B, et al. Angiogenic content of microparticles in patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease predicts networks of endothelial dysfunction. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2022;21(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s12933-022-01449-0. 

  45. Han Y, Kim SY. Endothelial senescence in vascular diseases: current understanding and future opportunities in senotherapeutics. Exp Mol Med. 2023;55:1-12. doi: 10.1038/s12276-022-00906-w.

  46. Wu CM, Zheng L, Wang Q, Hu YW. The emerging role of cell senescence in atherosclerosis. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2021;59(1):27-38. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2020-0601

  47. Schmidt TS, Alp NJ. Mechanisms for the role of tetrahydrobiopterin in endothelial function and vascular disease. Clin Sci (London). 2007;113(2):47-63. doi: 10.1042/CS20070108.

  48. Fukumura D, Gohongi T, Kadambi A, et al. Predominant role of endothelial nitric oxide synthase in vascular endothelial growth factor-induced angiogenesis and vascular permeability. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2001;98(5):2604-2609.  doi: 10.1073/pnas.041359198. 

  49. Wang L, Ge H, Peng L, Wang B. A meta-analysis of the relationship between VEGFR2 polymorphisms and atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Clin Cardiol. 2019;42(10):860-865. doi: 10.1002/clc.23233. 

  50. Shibuya M. Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1 (VEGFR-1/Flt-1): a dual regulator for angiogenesis. Angiogenesis. 2006;9(4):225-230. doi: 10.1007/s10456-006-9055-8.  

  51. Nemtsova V, Bilovol O, Shalimova A. Vascular endothelial growth factor as a marker of endothelial dysfunction in poly- and comorbidity: focus on hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus and subclinical hypothyroidism. Arterial Hypertens. 2019;23(2):98-104. doi: 10.5603/AH.a2019.0006. 

  52. Patel S, Nilsson MB, Xiuning L, et al. Molecular mechanisms and future implications of VEGF/VEGFR in cancer therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2023;29(1):30-39.  doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-1366.

  53. Li L, Wang H, Zhang J, et al. Effect of endothelial progenitor cell-derived extracellular vesicles on endothelial cell ferroptosis and atherosclerotic vascular endothelial injury. Cell Death Discov. 2021;7(1):235. doi: 10.1038/s41420-021-00610-0.

  54. Mak A, Chan JKY. Endothelial function and endothelial progenitor cells in systemic lupus erythematosus. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2022;18(5):286-300. doi: 10.1038/s41584-022-00770-y

  55. Heinisch PP, Bello C, Emmert MY, et al. Endothelial progenitor cells as biomarkers of cardiovascular pathologies: a narrative review. Cells. 2022;11(10):1678. doi: 10.3390/cells11101678.

  56. Du F, Zhou J, Gong R, et al. Endothelial progenitor cells in atherosclerosis. Front Biosci. 2012;17(6):2327-2349. doi: 10.2741/4055

  57. Pelliccia F, Zimarino M, De Luca G, et al. Endothelial progenitor cells in coronary artery disease: from bench to bedside. Stem Cells Transl Med. 2022;11(5):451-460. doi: 10.1093/stcltm/szac010.

  58. Altabas V, Bilos LSK. The role of endothelial progenitor cells in atherosclerosis and impact of anti-lipemic treatments on endothelial repair. Int J Mol Sci. 2022;23(5):2663. doi: 10.3390/ijms23052663.

  59. Lenk K, Uhlemann M, Schuler G, Adams V. Role of endothelial progenitor cells in the beneficial effects of physical exercise on atherosclerosis and coronary artery disease. J Appl Physiol. 2021;111(1):321-328. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01464.2010

  60. Akwii RG, Sajib MS, Zahra FR, Mikelis CM. Role of angiopoietin-2 in vascular physiology and pathophysiology. Cells. 2019;8(5):471. doi: 10.3390/cells8050471.

  61. Saharinen P, Eklund L, Alitalo K. Therapeutic targeting of the angiopoietin-TIE pathway. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017;16:635-661. doi: 10.1038/nrd.2016.278.

  62. Anisimov A, Fang S, Hemanthakumar KA, et al. The angiopoietin receptor Tie2 is atheroprotective in arterial endothelium. Nat Cardiovasc Res. 2023;2:307-321. doi: 10.1038/s44161-023-00224-y

  63. Sanchez FCL, Martinez GAC, Mendez-Garcia L, et al. Endoglin and other angiogenesis markers in recurrent varicose veins. J Pers Med. 2022;12(4):528. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01351. 

  64. Vischer UM. von Willebrand factor, endothelial dysfunction, and cardiovascular disease. J Thromb Haemost. 2006;4(6):1186-1193. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01949.x.

  65. Gamal Y, Badawy A, Ali AM, et al. Endothelial dysfunction in children with newly diagnosed Graves’ disease. Eur J Pediatr. 2023;182(6):2793-2800. doi: 10.1007/s00431-023-04919-z.

  66. Fan M, Wang X, Peng X, et al. Prognostic value of plasma von Willebrand factor levels in major adverse cardiovascular events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2020;20(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12872-020-01375-7.

  67. Peyvandi F, Garagiola, Baronciani L. Role of von Willebrand factor in the haemostasis. Blood Tranfus. 2011;9(Suppl 2):s3-s8. doi: 10.2450/2011.002S.

  68. Springer TA. von Willebrand factor, Jedi knight of the bloodstream. Blood. 2014;124(9):1412-1425. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-05-378638

  69. Schneider SW, Nuschele S, Wixforth A, et al. Shear-induced unfolding triggers adhesion of von Willebrand factor fibers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104(19):7899-7903. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0608422104.

  70. Chauhan AK, Kisucka J, Lamb CB, et al. von Willebrand factor and factor VIII are independently required to form stable occlusive thrombi in injured veins. Blood. 2007;109(6):2424-2429. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-06-028241

  71. Rezaie A, Giri H. Anticoagulant and signaling functions of antithrombin. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18(12):3142-3153. https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.15052.

  72. Song P, Xie J, Li W, et al. Effect of plasma thrombin-antithrombin complex on ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2023;12(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02174-9

  73. Gandrille S. Endothelial cell protein C receptor and the risk of venous thrombosis. Haematologica. 2008;93(6):812-816. https://doi.org/10.3324/haematol.13243.

More articles

Research Harmfulness of prooxidants in bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm children
Mariana Ceahlău1*, Rodica Selevestru1,2, Olga Tagadiuc3, Svetlana Șciuca1,2
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.01
Oxidative stress can be defined as the imbalance of the redox state of a certain system including living one (organelle, cell, organ/tissue), which excessively produces reactive oxygen and/or reactive nitrogen species (ROS/RNS) that exceed the capacity of the antioxidant defense system, which have the ability to slow down or even prevent the oxidative damage of macromolecules. Oxidative stress is a pathogenic mechanism of a large variety of diseases, including pulmonary one.
Research Predicting sympathovagal balance using parameters of breathing patterns in abdominal breathing
Abdominal breathing is utilized as a non-pharmacological treatment method for various stress-related conditions and autonomic dysfunctions. The objective of the study was to determine the predictors in the modulation of sympathovagal balance, as indicated by the ratio of low frequency to high frequency power of heart rate variability, by utilizing the respiratory pattern parameters recorded during the abdominal breathing model.
Research The impact of imuheptin and imupurin on cytokine profile and antioxidant status in rat model of inflammation
Ina Guțu1*, Nicolae Bacinschi1, Valentin Gudumac2
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.03
Insects, throughout evolution, have developed a huge arsenal of active compounds, which they use to defend themselves against enemies and diseases, at the same time in recent years insects have shown great interest as a source of food rich in biologically active substances. Research in recent decades has shown that insects produce a variety of proteins and peptides with antibacterial, antifungal, antiviral, immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antitumor, hepatoprotective, antithrombotic, antihypertensive and detoxifying activity during or after contact with the microbial agent or unfavourable factor.
Research Clinical effectiveness study of the new diagnostic score of acute appendicitis in the elderly
Acute appendicitis is among the three most frequent surgical diseases. The lifetime likelihood of developing acute appendicitis is around 7%. The incidence of acute appendicitis reduces with age after adolescence. Several studies evaluated the relevance of the current scores to the general population, mostly children, but a limited number of studies have studied the elderly population. This study aims to assess the clinical effectiveness of the new diagnostic score for the elderly population in comparison to both the Alvarado score and the non-standardized score.
Research Early results of endovascular treatment using percutaneous vacuum-assisted thromboaspiration in acute lower limb ischemia
Alexandru Predenciuc1*, Vasile Culiuc1,2, Dumitru Casian1,2
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.05
Open balloon thrombectomy and embolectomy remain the preferred initial option in the management of acute lower limb ischemia (ALI), but various endovascular techniques have become accessible and are growing in popularity. The aim of the study was to assess our early experience with percutaneous vacuum-assisted thromboaspiration using the Penumbra/Indigo® system for non-traumatic ALI.
Review Current affairs in the use of medical ozone. Biological effects. Mechanisms of action
Natalia Cernei1*, Serghei Șandru1, Serghei Cobîlețchi1, Ion Grabovschi2, Ivan Cîvîrjîc1, Ruslan Baltaga1,3
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.08
Oxygen-ozone therapy stands as a medically endorsed practice confirmed by numerous international clinical studies. Various authors have illustrated the beneficial clinical outcomes of ozone therapy in terms of its capacity to regulate redox balance, cellular inflammatory responses, and adaptation to ischemia/reperfusion processes. Ozone therapy extends to encompass a range of viral infections, inflammatory disorders, and degenerative ailments, used as both monotherapy and as an adjunct to unified conventional therapies.Introduction Ozone (O3), a gas discovered in the mid-19th century and composed of three oxygen atoms, represents a highly reactive allotropic form of oxygen. It exhibits high solubility in plasma, extracellular fluids, and water (approximately 10 times more soluble in water than conventional oxygen). At room temperature, it is unstable, causing rapid decomposition into ordinary diatomic oxygen. Notably, its half-life measures 25 minutes at 30°C, 40 minutes at 20°C, and 140 minutes at 0°C [1-10]. Medical ozone is a blend of oxygen and ozone derived from medical-grade oxygen through the utilization of a medical ozone generator. This medical ozone contains a concentration of 1-5% ozone and 90-95% pure medical oxygen, or 10-80 μg/mL (0.21-1.68 μmol/ml) of ozone per milliliter of blood. Ozone therapy stands as a current and significant avenue of research in contemporary medicine [1, 3-5, 7, 9, 10-15]. Oxygen-ozone therapy is a medically validated practice supported by numerous international clinical studies. Nowadays, many clinical trials have shown its beneficial effects on the modulation of the oxidoreduction balance, cellular inflammation state, and adaptation to ischemia/reperfusion processes. Ozonotherapy is an effective, safe, feasible, and easy-to-perform technique, which finds applications in various inflammatory, infectious, degenerative diseases, as well as in rehabilitation following acute cardiac and cerebral ischemic events. It demonstrates good efficacy both as an independent treatment and, notably, as an adjunct to conventional therapies [3-5, 7, 11, 16-22]. By incorporating this medical practice, patients can attain significant clinical benefits. When combined with standard therapies, it often leads to reduced medication dosages, complication rates, treatment duration, medication toxicity, and medical expenses. It also addresses the issue of bacterial resistance to antibiotics [2, 4, 18, 19, 21, 23]. In the context of the aforementioned, the purpose of this article is to present a synthesis of the most recent findings regarding ozone's mechanisms of action. Materials and methods To achieve the outlined purpose, an initial search of specialized scientific publications was conducted. These were identified through the Google Search engine, namely, PubMed, Hinari, SpringerLink, the National Center of Biotechnology Information, and Medline. The article selection criteria encompassed contemporary data regarding the mechanisms of action of ozone therapy, utilizing the following keywords: “ozone”, “ozone therapy”, “ozone mechanisms of action”, “biological effects of ozone”, “antioxidant effect”, “anti-inflammatory effect”, and “immunomodulatory effect.” These keywords were employed in various combinations to optimize search efficiency. For the advanced selection of bibliographic sources, the following filters were used: full-text articles, articles in English, articles published between 1990 and 2022. After a preliminary analysis of the titles, original articles, editorials, articles of narrative synthesis, taxonomy, and meta-analysis were selected, which contained up-to-date information and contemporary concepts regarding the mechanisms of ozone therapy. Furthermore, a search was conducted within the reference lists of the identified sources to highlight additional relevant publications that were not found during the initial database searches. The information from the publications included in the bibliography was gathered, organized, evaluated, and synthesized, showcasing the key aspects of the contemporary understanding of ozone's mechanisms of action, namely, its antioxidant capacity, vascular and hematological modulation, immune system activation, as well as its anti-inflammatory, bactericidal, virucidal, and fungicidal effects. To minimize the potential systematic errors (bias) in the study, a meticulous search was conducted within databases to identify a maximum number of relevant publications for the study's purpose. Only studies that satisfy validity criteria were evaluated, rigorous exclusion criteria for articles under consideration were applied, and a comprehensive review was conducted of both positive outcome studies and those that did not highlight the treatment's benefits. If necessary, additional sources of information were consulted to clarify some concepts. Duplicate publications and articles that did not meet the purpose of the article and were not available for full viewing were excluded from the list of publications generated by the search engine. Results Following the data processing, as identified by the Google Search engine and from databases such as PubMed, Hinari, SpringerLink, National Center of Biotechnology Information, and Medline, in accordance with the search criteria, a total 475 articles on the topic of ozone therapy were found. After a primary analysis of the titles, 59 articles were eventually deemed relevant for the given synthesis. Upon repeated review of these sources, a final selection of 52 relevant publications was ultimately made in alignment with the intended purpose. The final bibliography of this work comprises 52 articles that have been considered representative of the materials published on the subject of this synthesis article. Publications, the content of which did not reflect the relevant topic, despite being selected by the search program, as well as articles that were not accessible for open viewing through the HINARI (Health Internet Work Access to Research Initiative) database or available in the scientific medical library of the Nicolae Testemițanu State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, were subsequently removed from the list. Although ozone is the most potent natural oxidant, capable of oxidizing a wide range of organic and inorganic substances, and has the potential for cytotoxicity, researchers believe that under controlled conditions, it possesses numerous therapeutic effects. Moreover, the reactivity to ozone can be effectively mitigated by the blood and cellular antioxidant system [1, 2, 15, 24-28]. Initially used as an empirical approach, oxygen-ozone therapy has now evolved to a stage where the majority of ozone's biological mechanisms of action have been extensively studied and elucidated, these findings being found within the fields of biochemistry, physiology, and pharmacology [18, 22, 25, 27-29]. Ozone is not a pharmaceutical medicine but rather a regulatory molecule capable of generating bioactive mediators. The effects of ozone have been demonstrated to be consistent, safe, and associated with minimal preventable side effects [2, 30]. Chronic oxidative stress, chronic inflammatory processes, and immune overactivation are present and highly detrimental in a wide variety of diseases. The effectiveness of ozone therapy is determined by moderate oxidative stress, resulting from the interaction of ozone with the biological components of the body, triggering an endogenous cascade of biochemical reactions [31]. Ozone can function as an oxidant either directly, when it dissolves in plasma and other biological fluids, immediately reacting with polyunsaturated fatty acids, antioxidants, cysteine-rich proteins, and carbohydrates; or indirectly, by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS) and lipid oxidation products (LOP) [25, 28, 32-37]. At the onset of ozone therapy, an endogenous cascade is triggered, releasing bioactive substances in response to transient and moderately induced oxidative stress by ozone ('oxidative eustress'). Ozone can easily induce this oxidative stress due to its plasma solubility. Reacting with polyunsaturated fatty acids and water, ozone forms ROS in human fluids and tissues. The main molecule among ROS is hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) – a non-radical oxidant. Concurrently, ozone also gives rise to LOP – the lipoperoxide radical, hydroperoxides, malondialdehyde, isoprostanes, ozoneides, alkenes, and predominantly, 4-hydroxynonenal. ROS and LOP are the effector molecules responsible for modulating several biological and therapeutic effects in the body following ozone therapy [3, 8, 13, 27, 34, 37-39]. Having reacted with a number of biomolecules, ozone disappears, and hydrogen peroxide, the main molecule of ROS, and other mediators rapidly diffuse into cells, activating various metabolic pathways with numerous biological and therapeutic effects [3, 5, 27, 28, 35, 40]. Therefore, ROS and LOP are “biological messengers of ozone” and are responsible for the biological and therapeutic effects of ozone. ROSs are short-acting early messengers and are responsible for immediate biological effects, while LOPs are important late and long-term messengers [3, 5, 10, 13, 14, 17, 28, 36]. The formation of ROS in plasma occurs extremely quickly (less than a minute), accompanied by a moderate and transient decrease in the antioxidant capacity of the blood (from 5% to 25%). However, this antioxidant capacity returns to normal within 15-20 minutes [3, 9, 17, 28, 31, 40, 41]. Discussion Although not fully comprehended, the present article will delve into the mechanisms underlying the antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antimicrobial, antiviral, and analgesic effects of ozone. The antioxidative capacity is considered one of the key impacts of ozone therapy. Moderate oxidative stress induced by ozone within the therapeutic range (10-80 μg/mL), most commonly 30-45 μg/mL (the 'physiological' dose of ozone), physiologically effective and recommended levels for systemic application, elicits controlled low doses of ROS acting primarily as signaling molecules, thereby stimulating the formation of LOP. ROS triggers the activation of nuclear erythroid factor 2 (Nrf2), well known as a pivotal regulator of manifold cytoprotective responses, responsible for upregulating antioxidant enzyme activity. In response to transient, moderate oxidative stress, the levels of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, glutathione S-transferase, catalase, and heme oxygenase-1 increase. Thus, moderate, transient, and repetitive oxidative stress causes an intense modulation of antioxidants in the body. A multitude of cells across various organs upregulate the synthesis of antioxidants, which are capable of significantly countering excessive ROS, thereby alleviating chronic oxidative stress, which is present and extremely harmful in a variety of diseases Consequently, ozone, either through oxidative preconditioning or adaptation to chronic oxidative stress, safeguards tissue integrity against ROS-induced damage, fostering a balance between antioxidant and pro-oxidant factors while preserving cellular redox balance [27, 30, 41-45]. Nrf2 and nuclear factor kappa Β (NF-κB) represent the primary signaling pathways through which ozone exerts its effects. Nrf2 activation regulates cell defense and maintains cellular homeostasis [36]. Furthermore, ozone therapy fosters adaptation to oxidative stress by gently triggering the immune system, releasing growth factors, and/or activating metabolic pathways that contribute to maintaining redox balance [38]. By activating Nrf2, LOP induces oxidative stress proteins, including heme-oxygenase-1 (HO-1), another inhibitor of the NF-κB pathway and one of the most crucial antioxidant defense enzymes. Through inhibiting the high expression level of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α), it contributes to reducing the production of proinflammatory cytokines, directly activating anti-inflammatory cytokines, enhancing antioxidant protection, and consequently, safeguarding cellular integrity [8, 28, 30, 44-46]. Thus, ozone mimics acute oxidative stress which, when properly balanced, is not harmful, but can trigger several beneficial biochemical mechanisms. It can reactivate the intra- and extracellular antioxidant system, thereby reversing chronic oxidative stress in various inflammatory, degenerative processes, etc. During ozone treatment, cells throughout the body receive gradual and subtle impulses of LOP, significant long-term messengers that play a crucial role in up-regulating antioxidant enzymes in multiple cell types while rebalancing the oxidant/antioxidant system [46, 47]. Vascular and Hematological Modulation. Ozone serves as a catalyst for transmembrane oxygen flow. The increase in cellular oxygen levels resulting from ozone therapy enhances the efficiency of the mitochondrial respiratory chain. Moreover, ozone amplifies the production of prostacyclin, a widely acknowledged vasodilator [2, 6, 8, 26]. The effects of ozone on oxygen metabolism can be explained by promoting (1) changes in the rheological properties of blood (reversal of erythrocyte aggregation, increased flexibility and elasticity of red blood cells, favoring the transport and delivery of tissue oxygen), leading to enhanced blood flow in microcirculation; (2) increasing the speed of glycolysis in erythrocytes; and (3) the release of substances (adenosine triphosphate, nitric oxide, and prostaglandins) that may contribute to reducing peripheral vascular resistance and increasing oxygen supply to tissues [18, 25, 35, 37, 40, 48-50]. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) diffuses from the plasma into the cellular cytoplasm and serves as the triggering stimulus. Depending on the cell type, various biochemical pathways can be simultaneously activated in red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets, leading to a multitude of biological effects [10, 28, 32]. The Impact of Ozone on Erythrocytes. Erythrocytes are the focus of ROS. During erythropoiesis, submicromolar concentrations of LOP positively regulate the synthesis of antioxidant enzymes. Consequently, ozone therapy increases the glycolytic rate by enhancing intracellular adenosine triphosphate production. This approach intensifies erythrocyte generation, yielding metabolically enhanced erythrocytes (super-endowed erythrocytes) capable of more effectively transporting and delivering oxygen to tissues, including ischemic tissues, thereby correcting hypoxia in vascular diseases [7, 12, 25, 27, 28, 39, 48]. Coupled with increased nitric oxide synthase activity, there is a significant increase in nitric oxide, an essential element in maintaining optimal levels of vasodilation and blood perfusion [1, 6, 8, 40]. Ozone therapy, through careful regulation of ozone dosage, stimulates the production of antioxidant enzymes within the system (catalase, glutathione peroxidase, and superoxide dismutase) while mitigating excessive formation of ROS, thereby reducing chronic oxidative stress [1, 6, 12, 14, 39, 43, 49]. The impact of ozone on leukocytes. Ozone acts as a mild cytokine and serves as a cytokine inducer by lymphocytes and monocytes, thereby enhancing the immune system's activity. This stimulation fosters intercellular matrix synthesis and contributes to the healing process [1, 12, 32, 35, 37, 39]. The Impact of ozone on platelets. Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2) and other ROS generated through blood ozonation initiate a cascade of enzymatic reactions. These reactions gradually elevate intracellular Ca levels and trigger the release of prostaglandins (F2a and E2), leading to irreversible platelet aggregation. Increased levels of growth factors released from platelets, mobilization of endogenous stem cells, and stimulation of neoangiogenesis promote tissue regeneration, as well as healing of injuries and wounds [27, 49, 51]. Thus, the impact of ozone on oxygen metabolism is explained by how it alters the blood's rheological properties (reversing red blood cell clumping, enhancing the flexibility and elasticity of red blood cells, promoting the transport and delivery of oxygen to tissues). This, in turn, facilitates blood flow in the microcirculation, increases glycolysis in red blood cells, and triggers the production of substances (such as adenosine triphosphate, nitric oxide, and prostaglandins) that help reduce peripheral vascular resistance. Activation of the immune system. Ozone promotes an increase in the production of interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and some cytokines, with interleukin-2 (IL-2) being the primary one, subsequently triggering a whole cascade of immunological reactions [1, 2]. It has been shown that ROS, including H2O2 and LOP generated by ozone therapy, can easily diffuse into plasma cells and activate NF-κB, inducing the production of immunoactive cytokines in normal cells (IL-2, tumor necrosis factor alpha - TNF-a, IL-6 and IFN-γ), thereby enhancing the immune response [9, 13, 14, 26, 32, 40, 44]. Ozone indirectly activates the innate (non-specific) immune system by enhancing phagocytosis and promoting the synthesis of cytokines and interleukins in neutrophils and leukocytes. It also triggers the components of both cellular and humoral immunity [8, 26, 33, 39]. Within mononuclear cells, ozone stimulates immune responses by modulating the NF-kB transcription factor, thereby reactivating the suppressed immune system [27, 28]. Furthermore, ROSs trigger the activation of the immune system, which acts through monocytes and lymphocytes, promoting the production of a variety of cytokines (IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, IFN-β, IFN-γ, TNFα) [6, 49]. Thus, ozone induces mild immune system activation by stimulating neutrophils and initiating the synthesis of certain cytokines that trigger a whole cascade of immunological responses. Bactericidal, virucidal and fungicidal action of ozone. Ozone used in vitro acts directly on the membrane of bacterial cells (direct oxidative effect), disrupting and damaging the integrity of bacterial cell membranes, oxidizing phospholipids and lipoproteins, thereby impeding their enzymatic function. Additionally, ozone damages the viral capsids, disturbing their structure and interfering with the virus-cell interaction, leading to disruption in the reproductive cycle. When it comes to fungi, ozone inhibits cell growth by perturbing intracellular homeostasis, resulting from the compromised barrier properties of the plasma membrane [2, 6, 12, 16, 26, 44, 48, 50]. Although ozone is one of the most potent disinfectants, used in various ways, it cannot deactivate any pathogens (bacteria, viruses, and fungi) in vivo. This is because pathogens are well protected, especially within cells, by the cell's powerful antioxidant system. Consequently, ozone acts as a gentle enhancer of the immune system by activating neutrophils and stimulating the synthesis of certain cytokines [1, 10, 19, 22, 28, 39, 46]. The anti-inflammatory effect is revealed in ozone's ability to influence the inflammatory cascade by oxidizing biologically active substances (arachidonic acid and its derivatives - prostaglandins), which participate in the development and sustenance of the inflammatory process. Additionally, ozone significantly reduces the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α) without any signs of toxicity or recorded side effects [8, 26, 30, 31]. These cytokines induce the prostaglandin E2 pathway, which causes pain or increases the sensitivity of nerve roots to other algogenic substances (such as bradykinin) [31]. Severe oxidative stress, triggered by high concentrations of ozone, along with proinflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, TNF-α), activate NF-κB, a key regulator of the inflammatory response and muscle atrophy. This contributes to an increased inflammatory response and tissue damage, including the release of other inflammatory factors that enhance the migration of eosinophils and neutrophils [9, 13, 17, 47, 49]. On the contrary, mild oxidative stress induced by precise and small doses of ozone activates Nrf2. The latter indirectly inhibits the pro-inflammatory mechanism driven by the NF-kB pathway. As a result, there is a reduction in NF-κB activity along with a modification in the expression of inflammatory cytokines associated with NF-kB activity. This triggers an anti-inflammatory effect, leading to a decrease in IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, IL-7, and TNFα, as well as an increase in interleukins such as IL-4, IL-10, IL-13, and the transforming growth factor beta – TGF-β [11, 13, 19, 38, 43, 49, 50]. Nrf2 also plays an important role in intracellular inflammatory signaling pathways. Triggering the Nrf2-antioxidant signal can dampen NF-kB activity, leading to the downregulation of the inflammatory response by suppressing essential inflammatory mediators and cytokines (IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-a) [31, 38, 42, 50]. Moreover, a small amount of H2O2 stimulates the NF-kB pathway, which is typically balanced out by the Nrf2's blocking action, resulting in an immunomodulatory effect [11]. The analgesic effect of ozone is ensured by the oxidation of the byproducts of albuminolysis, known as algopeptides, which act on the nerve endings in the damaged tissue and determine the intensity of the pain response. Additionally, the analgesic effect is attributed to the restoration of the antioxidant system and, subsequently, the reduction of harmful molecular byproducts from lipid peroxidation [26]. Recent preclinical studies have elucidated the role of ROS in hyperalgesia by activating N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors [11]. Following ozone therapy, there has been a demonstrated increase in antioxidant molecules (serotonin and endogenous opioids), which induce pain relief by stimulating antinociceptive pathways [31, 39]. Data from scientific research acknowledge that the mechanisms of action of ozone are due to: (1) a decrease in the production of inflammatory mediators; (2) oxidation (inactivation) of metabolic mediators of pain; (3) improvement of local blood microcirculation leading to improved oxygen delivery to tissues; (4) elimination of toxins and resolution of physiological disorders that generate pain [42, 52]. Therefore, ozone exhibits pleiotropic properties, extending beyond its exclusive role as an antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, or immunomodulatory one. It also encompasses the capacity to employ ROS as a signaling molecule rather than merely as intracellular toxic substances. In existing experimental models and clinical studies, the anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, regenerative and immunomodulatory effects of ozone therapy have been associated with several molecular mechanisms, the main ones being the NF-kB/Nrf2 balance and IL-6 and IL-1β expression. NF-kB and Nrf2 are the most studied and important transcription factors and regulatory proteins that control the expression of a wide range of genes, encoding proteins involved in a multitude of vital biological functions, including those associated with redox status, immunity, and inflammatory responses. Additionally, indirectly through these pathways, LOP initiates the HIF-1α, HO-1, and NO/iNOS pathways. The main pharmacological effects of medical ozone through ozone-produced peroxides are as follows: (1) increased oxygen release by erythrocytes due to activated metabolism; (2) immunomodulation due to leukocyte activation; and (3) regulation of cellular antioxidants via Nrf2 signaling. Ozone therapy can elicit the following biological reactions: (a) improved blood circulation and oxygen delivery to ischemic tissue; (b) optimization of overall metabolism by improving oxygen delivery; (c) regulation of cellular antioxidant enzymes and induction of HO-1; (d) triggering a mild immune system activation and intensified release of growth factors; (e) providing a state of well-being in most patients, probably due to stimulation of the neuroendocrine system. Conclusions 1. Ozone induces both mild and moderate oxidative stress. When appropriately balanced, this stress poses no harm; instead, it can initiate several beneficial biochemical mechanisms. These mechanisms, in turn, reactivate the intracellular and extracellular antioxidant systems, effectively countering long-term oxidative stress in various inflammatory and degenerative processes, etc. Cells throughout the body receive small and gradual bursts of lipid oxidation products, important late and long-term messengers that are responsible for activating antioxidant enzymes in many cell types to rebalance the oxidant/antioxidant system. 2. The impact of ozone on oxygen metabolism is explained by changes in the blood's rheological properties. This involves reversing red blood cell aggregation, enhancing the flexibility and elasticity of hemoglobin, and promoting the efficient transport and delivery of oxygen to tissues. This process also facilitates blood flow within microcirculation, speeds up glycolysis within red blood cells, and triggers the release of substances like adenosine triphosphate, nitric oxide, and prostaglandins, which help to reduce peripheral vascular resistance. 3. Ozone triggers a slight activation of the immune system by up-regulating and activating neutrophils and promoting the synthesis of cytokines (IL-2, TNF-a, IL-6, and IFN-γ), setting off a chain reaction of immune responses. 4. Ozone therapy induces the following biological responses: enhanced blood circulation and oxygen delivery to ischemic tissue, regulation of cellular antioxidant enzymes, mild immune system activation, and intensified release of growth factors. 5. Ozone is an inherently toxic gas that should never be inhaled, cannot be stored, and must be handled with caution. Generally, no toxic effects were reported, and only the respiratory tract was found to be highly sensitive to inhaled ozone since the respiratory mucosal cells contain a minimal amount of antioxidants and are extremely susceptible to oxidation. 6. Although ozone ranks among the most potent disinfectants, being employed in various ways, it cannot neutralize any pathogens (bacteria, viruses, and fungi) in vivo, since pathogens are effectively shielded by the strong blood and cellular antioxidant system. Furthermore, elevated ozone concentrations induce severe oxidative stress, prompting increased inflammatory responses and tissue damage. Competing interests None declared. Authors’ contribution NC and RB conceived the study, participated in the study design and assisted in drafting the manuscript. SȘ and IC performed the analysis and data interpretation. IG drafted the manuscript. SC conceived the significant revision of the manuscript and provided significant intellectual involvement. The authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Authors’ ORCID IDs Natalia Cernei – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2031-5881 Serghei Șandru – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2973-9154 Ion Grabovschi – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7716-9926 Ivan Cîvîrjîc – https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1360-5485 Ruslan Baltaga – https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0659-4877 References 1. Cakir R. General aspects of ozone therapy [Internet]. In: Atroshi F, editor. Pharmacology and nutritional intervention in the treatment of disease. London: IntechOpen, 2014 [cited 2023 Apr 12]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/57470 2. Elvis A.M., Ekta J.S. Ozone therapy: a clinical review. J. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med., 2011 Jan; 2 (1): 66-70. doi: 10.4103/0976-9668.82319. 3. Bocci V. Ozone: a new medical drug. 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 2011; 315p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9234-2. 4. Allorto N. Oxygen-ozone therapy: an extra weapon for the general practitioners and their patients. Ozone Ther., 2019 July; 4 (2): 8424. doi: 10.4081/ozone.2019.8424. 5. Baeza-Noci J., Cabo-Soler J.R., Moraleda-Gómez M. et al. Revisión WFOT sobre Ozonoterapia Basada en Evidencias. Comité Científico Asesor de la WFOT – 2015 [WFOT Review on Evidence-Based Ozone Therapy. WFOT Scientific Advisory Committee – 2015]. Brescia: World Federation of Ozone Therapy, 2015; 117p. Spanish. https://semdor.es/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/WFOT-OZONE-2015-ESP.pdf. 6. Scassellati C., Ciani M., Galoforo A., Zanardini R., Bonvicini C., Geroldi C. Molecular mechanisms in cognitive frailty: potential therapeutic targets for oxygen-ozone treatment. Mech. Ageing Dev., 2020 Mar; 186: 111210. doi: 10.1016/j.mad.2020.111210. 7. Yousefi B., Banihashemian S., Feyzabadi Z., Hasanpour S., Kokhaei P., Abdolshahi A. et al. Potential therapeutic effect of oxygen-ozone in controlling of COVID-19 disease. Med. Gas Res., 2022 Apr-Jun; 12 (2): 33-40. doi: 10.4103/2045-9912.325989. 8. Smith N., Wilson A., Gandhi J., Vatsia S., Khan S. Ozone therapy: an overview of pharmacodynamics, current research, and clinical utility. Med. Gas Res., 2017 Oct 17; 7 (3): 212-9. doi: 10.4103/2045-9912.215752. 9. Sagai M., Bocci V. Mechanisms of action involved in ozone therapy: is healing induced via a mild oxidative stress? Med. Gas Res., 2011 Dec 20; 1:29. doi: 10.1186/2045-9912-1-29. 10. Bocci V., Borrelli E., Travagli V., Zanardi I. The ozone paradox: ozone is a strong oxidant as well as a medical drug. Med. Res. Rev., 2009 Jul; 29 (4): 646-82. doi: 10.1002/med.20150. 11. Hidalgo-Tallón F., Torres-Morera L., Baeza-Noci J., Carrillo-Izquierdo M., Pinto-Bonilla R. Updated review on ozone therapy in pain medicine. Front. Physiol., 2022 Feb 23; 13: 840623. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2022.840623. 12. Manjunath R., Singla D., Singh A. Ozone revisited. J. Adv. Oral Res., 2015 May-Aug; 6 (2): 5-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/222941122015020. 13. Cenci A., Macchia I., La Sorsa V., Sbarigia C., Di Donna V., Pietraforte D. Mechanisms of action of ozone therapy in emerging viral diseases: immunomodulatory effects and therapeutic advantages with reference to SARS-CoV-2. Front Microbiol., 2022 Apr 21; 13: 871645. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.871645. 14. du Plessis L.H., van der Westhuizen F.H., Kotzé H.F. The protective effect of plasma antioxidants during ozone autohemotherapy. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 2008 Aug; 7 (14): 2472-7. doi: 10.4314/ajb.v7i14.59039. 15. Rowen R.J. Ozone and oxidation therapies as a solution to the emerging crisis in infectious disease management: a review of current knowledge and experience. Med. Gas Res., 2019 Oct-Dec; 9 (4): 232-7. doi: 10.4103/2045-9912.273962. 16. Tizaoui C. Ozone: a potential oxidant for COVID-19 virus (SARSCoV-2). Ozone Sci. Eng., 2020 Jul; 42 (5): 378-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/01919512.2020.1795614. 17. Zanardi I., Borrelli E., Valacchi G., Travagli V., Bocci V. Ozone: a multifaceted molecule with unexpected therapeutic activity. Curr. Med. Chem., 2016; 23 (4): 304-14. doi: 10.2174/0929867323666151221150420. 18. Radzimierska M., Śmigielski K. Ozone and products of ozonation in medical use. Biomed J. Sci. Tech. Res., 2019 Apr; 17 (1): 002959. doi: 10.26717/BJSTR.2019.17.002959. 19. de Sire A., Agostini F., Lippi L., Mangone M., Marchese S., Cisari C. et al. Oxygen-Ozone therapy in the rehabilitation field: state of the art on mechanisms of action, safety and effectiveness in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Biomolecules, 2021 Feb 26; 11 (3): 356. doi: 10.3390/biom11030356. 20. Wen Q., Liu D., Wang X., Zhang Y., Fang S., Qiu X. et al. A systematic review of ozone therapy for treating chronically refractory wounds and ulcers. Int. Wound J., 2022 May; 19 (4): 853-70. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13687. 21. Mendes C., Cunha M., Ferreira A., Santos E. Ozone therapy as a coadjuvant in wound healing and pain reduction. Millenium, 2021 Sep; 2 (9): 131-8. https://doi.org/10.29352/mill029e.25237. 22. Smith A., Oertle J., Warren D., Pratoet D. Ozone therapy: a critical physiological and diverse clinical evaluation with regard to immune modulation, anti-infectious properties, anti-cancer potential, and impact on anti-oxidant enzymes. Open J. Mol. Integr. Physiol., 2015 Aug; 5 (3): 37-48. doi: 10.4236/ojmip.2015.53004. 23. León Fernández O.S., Oru G.T., Hansler R.V., Cabreja G.L., Espinosa I.S., Polo Vega J.P. et al. Medical Ozone: the pharmacological mechanisms accounting for its effectiveness against COVID-19/SARS-COV-2. J. Med. Clin. Res. Rev., 2021 Mar; 5 (3): 1-10. doi: 10.33425/2639-944X.1199. 24. Bocci V. Biological and clinical effects of ozone. Has ozone therapy a future in medicine? Br. J. Biomed. Sci., 1999 Apr; 56 (4): 270-9. 25. Di Mauro R., Cantarella G., Bernardini R., Di Rosa M., Barbagallo I., Distefano A. et al. The biochemical and pharmacological properties of Ozone: the smell of protection in acute and chronic diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2019 Feb 1; 20 (3): 634. doi: 10.3390/ijms20030634. 26. Maslennikov O.V., Kontorshchikova C.N., Gribkova I.A. Ozone therapy in practice. Health manual [Internet]. Nizhny Novgorod (Russia); 2008 [cited 2023 Feb 23]. 42 p. Available from: https://absoluteozone.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Ozone-Therapy-in-Practice.pdf. 27. Tricarico G., Travagli V. The relationship between Ozone and human blood in the course of a well-controlled, mild, and transitory oxidative eustress. Antioxidants (Basel), 2021 Dec 4; 10 (12): 1946. doi: 10.3390/antiox10121946. 28. Borrelli E., Bocci V. Basic biological and therapeutic effects of ozone therapy in human medicine [Internet]. In: Munter R, editor. Ozone science and technology. Oxford, UK: Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, 2010 [cited 2022 Apr 18]. Available from: https://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c07/E6-192-15-00.pdf 29. Inal M., Dokumacioglu A., Özcelik E., Ucar O. The effects of ozone therapy and coenzyme Q₁₀ combination on oxidative stress markers in healthy subjects. Ir. J. Med. Sci., 2011 Sep; 180 (3): 703-7. doi: 10.1007/s11845-011-0675-7. 30. Chirumbolo S., Valdenassi L., Simonetti V., Bertossi D., Ricevuti G., Franzini M. et al. Insights on the mechanisms of action of ozone in the medical therapy against COVID-19. Int. Immunopharmacol., 2021 Jul; 96: 107777. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2021.107777. 31. de Sire A., Marotta N., Ferrillo M., Agostini F., Sconza C., Lippi L. et al. Oxygen-ozone therapy for reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines serum levels in musculoskeletal and temporomandibular disorders: a comprehensive review. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2022 Feb 25; 23 (5): 2528. doi: 10.3390/ijms23052528. 32. Bocci V., Zanardi I., Travagli V. Has oxygen-ozonetherapy a future in medicine? J. Exp. Integr. Med., 2011 Jan; 1: 5-11. doi: 10.5455/jeim.161210.ir.002. 33. Néri J., Lomba E., Karam A., Reis S., Marchionni A., Medrado A. Ozone therapy influence in the tissue repair process: a literature review. J. Oral Diagn., 2017 Jul; 2: e20170032. doi: 10.5935/2525-5711.20170032. 34. Bocci V., Valacchi G., Corradeschi F., Fanetti G. Studies on the biological effects of ozone: 8. Effects on the total antioxidant status and on interleukin-8 production. Mediators Inflamm., 1998 Jul; 7 (5): 313-7. doi: 10.1080/09629359890820. 35. Bocci V. Oxygen-ozone therapy: a critical evaluation. Dordrect: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002. 440 p. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9952-8. 36. Viebahn-Haensler R., León Fernández O. Ozone in Medicine. The low-dose ozone concept and its basic biochemical mechanisms of action in chronic inflammatory diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2021 Jul 23; 22 (15): 7890. doi: 10.3390/ijms22157890. 37. Bocci V. Ozone as Janus: this controversial gas can be either toxic or medically useful. Mediators Inflamm., 2004 Feb; 13 (1): 3-11. doi: 10.1080/0962935062000197083. 38. Scassellati C., Galoforo A., Bonvicini C., Esposito C., Ricevuti G. Ozone: a natural bioactive molecule with antioxidant property as potential new strategy in aging and in neurodegenerative disorders. Ageing Res. Rev., 2020 Nov; 63: 101138. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2020.101138. 39. Bocci V., Zanardi I., Travagli V. Ozone acting on human blood yields a hormetic dose-response relationship. J. Transl. Med., 2011 May 17; 9: 66. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-9-66. 40. International Scientific Committee of Ozonetherapy (ISCO3). Madrid Declaration on Ozone Therapy [Internet]. 2nd ed. Madrid: ISCO3; 2012 [cited 2023 Feb 23]. 50 p. Available from: https://bornclinic.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/OZONE-THERAPY.pdf. 41. Thorp J., Thorp K., Thorp E., Viglione D. Ozone preconditioning in viral disease. Virol. Curr. Res. [Internet], 2022; 6 (S1): 001 [cited 2023 Feb 23]. Available from: https://www.hilarispublisher.com/open-access/ozone-preconditioning-in-viral-disease.pdf. 42. Chirumbolo S., Varesi A., Franzini M., Valdenassi L., Pandolfi S., Tirelli U. et al. The mito-hormetic mechanisms of ozone in the clearance of SARS-CoV2 and in the COVID-19 therapy. Biomedicines, 2022 Sep 12; 10 (9): 2258. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines10092258. 43. Pivotto A.P., Banhuk F.W., Staffen I.V., Daga M.A., Ayala T.S., Menolli R.A. Clinical uses and molecular aspects of ozone therapy: a review. OnLine J. Biol. Sci., 2020 Feb; 20 (1): 37-49. https://doi.org/10.3844/ojbsci.2020.37.49. 44. Obeid B.M. Ozone autohemotherapy: possible mechanisms of anti-viral action and anti oxidative. J. Infect. Dis. Epidemiol., 2020 Apr; 6: 117. doi: 10.23937/2474-3658/1510117. 45. Galiè M., Covi V., Tabaracci G., Malatesta M. The role of Nrf2 in the antioxidant cellular response to medical ozone exposure. Int. J. Mol. Sci., 2019 Aug 17; 20 (16): 4009. doi: 10.3390/ijms20164009. 46. Martínez-Sánchez G., Schwartz A., Donna V. Potential cytoprotective activity of ozone therapy in SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19. Antioxidants (Basel), 2020 May 6; 9 (5): 389. doi: 10.3390/antiox9050389. 47. Ranaldi G., Villani E., Franza L. Rationale for ozone-therapy as an adjuvant therapy in COVID-19: a narrative review. Med. Gas Res., 2020 Jul-Sep; 10 (3): 134-8. doi: 10.4103/2045-9912.289462. 48. Bodrug N., Barba D., Istrati V., Botezatu A. Eficacitatea terapiei cu ozon în medicină [Effectiveness of ozone therapy in medicine]. Chișinău: Medicina, 2012. 116 p. Romanian. 49. Dias E.N., Andrade K.F., Silveira R.S., Machado R.R.P. [The acting of ozoniotherapy in wounds, neuropathies, infections and inflammations: a systematic review]. Braz. J. Dev., 2021; 7 (5): 48604-29. Portuguese. https://doi.org/10.34117/bjdv.v7i5.29786. 50. Borges F., Meyer P., Jahara R., de Morais Carreiro E., Antonuzzo P., Picariello F. et al. Fundamentals of the use of ozone therapy in the treatment of aesthetic disorders: a review. J. Biosci. Med., 2021 Dec; 9: 40-70. doi: 10.4236/jbm.2021.912005. 51. Fitzpatrick E., Holland O., Vanderlelie J. Ozone therapy for the treatment of chronic wounds: a systematic review. Int. Wound J., 2018 Aug; 15 (4): 633-44. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12907. 52. Franzini M., Valdenassi L., Pandolfi S., Tirelli U., Ricevuti G., Simonetti V. et al. The biological activity of medical ozone in the hormetic range and the role of full expertise professionals. Front Public Health, 2022 Sep 16; 10: 979076. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.979076.
Review The role of the lateral pterygoid muscle in temporomandibular disorders
Vitalie Pântea1*, Felicia Tabără1, Mariana Ceban1, Veronica Burduja1, Lilian Nistor2, Olga Ursu3
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.09
The clinical concept that would argue that the activity of the lateral pterygoid muscle, being disturbed, would play an important role as an etiological factor in temporomandibular joint dysfunctions is still widely accepted, being also a decisive factor in the correct choice of the treatment plan. However, because of the fact that very few research and clear evidence were conducted and presented to support completely that concept, it continues to remain a very controversial one.
Case study Laser ureteroscopic endopyelotomy efficacy in pyeloureteral junction stenosis
Vladimir Caraion1*, Eduard Pleșca2, Andrei Mezu2, Corneliu Maximciuc2
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.10
Pyeloureteral junction stenosis (PUJS) is a condition that affects urinary drainage at level of the renal pelvis and upper ureter. It is found in approximately 1 in 500 newborns, with a higher prevalence in males (2:1 ratio). PUJS is the main cause of congenital hydronephrosis and can also be caused by other specific pathologies. Endoscopic management is the primary treatment for PUJS, particularly in cases of aperistaltic and <2cm intrinsic ureteral stenosis without aberrant vessels.
Case study Treatment of deep carious lesions with mineral trioxide aggregate: clinical case report
Diana Trifan*, Diana Uncuța
https://doi.org/10.52645/MJHS.2023.3.11
Deep carious lesions are a dental disease widely spread among population of all ages. From clinical point of view, they have little symptoms and go unnoticed by the patients a long time, until they provoke dental pulp inflammations. If diagnosed and treated properly, the tooth can be treated conservatively with certain techniques of pulp vitality preservation. An important role in this process plays the innate capacity of regeneration of the pulp-dentine complex and the enhanced stimulating properties of new biomaterials used in dentistry. The aim of this clinical case report is to describe the clinical manifestations and the diagnostic algorithm used in deep caries and to establish a clinical guideline of treatment of deep carious lesion with a calcium silicate hydraulic cement.