Sex Differences in the Oxidative Stress and Inflammation Response During and After Simulated Hemorrhage in Humans
Authors: Barnes Haley , Rosenberg Alexander , Luu My-Loan , Anderson Garen , Rickards Caroline 
Published: April 2020

Introduction

Hemorrhage (i.e., massive blood loss) induces an oxidative stress and inflammatory response that can persist even following hemostasis and resuscitation. These responses can result in tissue and organ damage if therapeutic inventions are delayed. Pre‐menopausal females exhibit a survival advantage following hemorrhage compared to males of a similar age. The role of oxidative stress and inflammation on increased survival from blood loss in young females is under investigation. Examining the potential mechanisms underpinning this survival advantage following hemorrhage may facilitate the development of sex‐specific therapies. In our laboratory, we utilize lower body negative pressure (LBNP) to simulate blood loss in conscious human subjects. In this study, we hypothesized that young males would elicit a greater oxidative stress and inflammatory response compared to young females, both during and after a simulated hemorrhage via LBNP.

Methods

Young, healthy human subjects (10F; 10M) participated in a stepwise‐LBNP protocol to presyncope. Stroke volume was estimated via finger photoplethysmography as a marker of central hypovolemia (indexed to body surface area). Venous blood samples were collected at baseline, at the onset of presyncope, and 60‐min into recovery (i.e., following “resuscitation”). The oxidative stress response was assessed via measurement of circulating F2‐Isoprostanes (F2‐IsoP) using gas chromatography‐negative ion chemical ionization‐mass spectrometry. The inflammatory response was assessed via measurement of circulating interleukin (IL)‐6 and IL‐10 using a MSD® Multiplex assay. Unpaired t‐tests were used to compare LBNP tolerance and stroke volume responses between male and female subjects. Two factor (time and sex) linear mixed model analyses with repeated measures were performed for all other comparisons, followed by Holm‐corrected post‐hoc tests. All data are represented as mean ± SE.

Results

LBNP tolerance time was similar between male and female subjects (Males, 1592 ± 124 s vs. Females, 1437 ± 113 s; P=0.37), and stroke volume index decreased by a similar magnitude at presyncope (Males, −50.2 ± 6.3% vs. Females, −49.4 ± 3.2%; P = 0.87). There was no effect of time or sex on [F2‐IsoP] or on the %Δ [F2‐IsoP] during or after LBNP (P ≥ 0.12). However, male subjects exhibited a greater increase in both the %Δ [IL‐6] and %Δ [IL‐10] compared to female subjects at the 60‐min recovery time point (IL‐6: Males, 101.4 ± 138.9% vs. Females, 12.3 ± 34.0%; P = 0.06. IL‐10: Males, 71.1 ± 133.3% vs. Females, −2.2 ± 11.8%; P = 0.06).

Conclusion

These data suggest that there may be a sex difference in the inflammatory response to blood loss and subsequent fluid resuscitation. Future clinical studies should continue to explore sex differences in inflammatory responses to actual blood loss, and tailor therapeutic interventions accordingly.

Support or Funding Information

William and Ella Owens Medical Research Foundation