Objective To construct the epidermal model with HaCaT cells and evaluate the feasibility of this model as an in vitro skin irritation test tool. Methods The HaCaT model was reconstructed with HaCaT cells by adoption gas-liquid surface culture technique, and the EpiKutis® model was reconstructed with human epidermal keratinocytes by the same techinique as control. Morphology changes of HaCaT and EpiKutis® models were observed by HE staining. Barrier function assessment was performed with penetration test. According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Test Guideline 439, the surface of the HaCaT and the EpiKutis® models were treated with 20 chemicals for 30 minutes, incubated for 42 hours, and determined tissue viability by MTT assay, to evaluate the irritation of chemicals. Then the results were compared with the irritation of chemicals with the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (UN GHS) system and validated reference method (VRM) for the classification of chemical, and evaluated the feasibility of this model as an in vitro skin irritation test tool. Results The results of HE staining showed that there was no complete stratified structure in the HaCaT model. The results of barrier function showed that the ET50 was 0.99 hours. The results of skin irritation of chemicals showed that the sensitivity was 100% and 100%, the specificity was 50% and 70%, and the accuracy rate was 75% and 85% for HaCaT model and EpiKutis® model respectively. Conclusion The epidermal model of HaCaT cells does not possess the complete epidermal physiological structure, the barrier function as ET50 of the HaCaT model is lower than EpiKutis® model, the chemicals in vitro skin irritation test results do not meet the OECD criteria for the determination of stimulants, so the HaCaT model is not suitable as a replacement tool in vitro to determine the chemicals skin irritation.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of Salvia miltiorrhiza injection in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, VIP, WanFang Data, and CNKI databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of Salvia miltiorrhiza injection in treatment of AIS from inception to February 2021. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed using Stata 16.0 software and RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 160 RCTs were included. The measures included 7 Chinese medicine injections and 8 treatment measures, covering Danhong injection combined with conventional treatment (DH+CT), Danshen injection combined with conventional treatment (DS+CT), Danshen ligustrazine injection combined with conventional treatment (DSCXQ+CT), Danshen polyphenolic acid for injection combined with conventional treatment (DSDFS+CT), compound Danshen injection combined with conventional treatment (FFDS+CT), Danshen polyphenolate for injection combined with conventional treatment (SI+CT), and Sodium Tanshinone ⅡA Sulfonate injection combined with conventional treatment (STS+CT) and conventional treatment (CT). Results of network meta-analysis showed that for the total effective rate, the rank of cumulative probability was: DSDFS+CT (93.0%) > DH+CT (80.5%) > STS+CT (66.7%) > DSCXQ+CT (66.4%) > SI+CT (50.0%)> DS+CT (26.7%)> FFDS+CT (16.7%)> CT (0.1%). In terms of NIHSS, the rank of cumulative probability was: STS+CT (95.5%) >DH+CT (80.9%)> DSCXQ+CT (70.1%) > SI+CT (64.7%) > DSDFS+CT (42.0%) > FFDS+CT (24.4%) > DS+CT (20.1%) > CT (2.4%). In the aspect of Barthel index, the rank of cumulative probability was: DH+CT (76.2%) > DSCXQ+CT (74.3%) > STS+CT (64.1%) > DSDFS+CT (62.2%) > FFDS+CT (51.8%) > SI+CT (46.0 %) > DS+CT (21.7%)> CT (3.8%). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, for patients with AIS, DSDFS has an improved effect on the total effective rate, while STS and DH show advantages in NIHSS score and Barthel index. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high-quality studies are required to verify the above conclusions.