AJP - Heart Watch the video to see how APS reaches out to developing nations.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 284: H1240-H1250, 2003. First published December 12, 2002; doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00467.2002
0363-6135/03 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
284/4/H1240    most recent
00467.2002v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fu, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fu, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.
Vol. 284, Issue 4, H1240-H1250, April 2003

An electrodiffusion model for effects of surface glycocalyx layer on microvessel permeability

Bingmei M. Fu1,2, Bin Chen1, and Wenhao Chen1

1 Department of Mechanical Engineering and 2 Cancer Institute, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada 89154


    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

To investigate the charge effect of the endothelial surface glycocalyx on microvessel permeability, we extended the three-dimensional model developed by Fu et al. (J Biomech Eng 116: 502-513, 1994) for the interendothelial cleft to include a negatively charged glycocalyx layer at the entrance of the cleft. Both electrostatic and steric exclusions on charged solutes were considered within the glycocalyx layer and at the interfaces. Four charge-density profiles were assumed for the glycocalyx layer. Our model indicates that the overall solute permeability across the microvessel wall including the surface glycocalyx layer and the cleft region is independent of the charge-density profiles as long as they have the same maximum value and the same total charge. On the basis of experimental data, this model predicts that the charge density would be 25-35 meq/l in the glycolcalyx of frog mesenteric capillaries. An intriguing prediction of this model is that when the concentrations of cations and anions are unequal in the lumen due to the presence of negatively charged proteins, the negatively charged glycocalyx would provide more resistance to positively charged solutes than to negatively charged ones.

model for charge effect of endothelial surface glycocalyx; microvessel permeability to charged molecules; interendothelial cleft


    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

THE ENDOTHELIAL CELL GLYCOCALYX is an extracellular matrix that is expressed on the luminal surface of the endothelial cells forming the microvessel wall. This matrix is believed to be composed primarily of proteoglycans, glycoproteins, and glycosaminoglycans (14, 18, 19, 21). Because of its distinct location in the transvascular pathway, in conjunction with the intercellular junctions in the cleft between adjacent endothelial cells, the surface glycocalyx is of great importance in determining the microvessel permeability (P) to water and solutes.

Adamson et al. (2) showed that for similar size globular proteins, alpha -lactalbumin (molecular weight = 14,176) and ribonuclease (molecular weight = 13,683), the permeability of the frog mesenteric capillary to positively charged ribonuclease (net charge = +3, including the charge effect from fluorescent probe labeling; Pribonuclease = 4.3 × 10-6 cm/s) was twice that of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin (net charge = -11, including the charge effect from fluorescent probe labeling; Palpha -lactalbumin = 2.1 × 10-6 cm/s). Their experiments suggested that the microvessel wall contains negative charges, which enhance the transport of positively charged molecules but retard that of negatively charged molecules. With the use of a Donnan-type model (see below) for electrostatic partitioning, they estimated that the charge density in the microvessel wall was ~11.4 meq/l.

This charge effect of the microvessel wall has also been shown in other experiments. Curry et al. (6) measured Pribonuclease and Palpha -lactalbumin in microvessels perfused with orosomucoid in a Ringer-albumin perfusate. They found that Pribonuclease was six times that of Palpha -lactalbumin in the presence of orosomucoid. In the presence of orosomucoid, Palpha -lactalbumin was only about one-half of the value in the absence of orosomucoid. They suggested that these results could be accounted for if orosomucoid increased the net negative charge on microvessel walls in the frog mesentery from 11.2 to 28 meq/l. Huxley and Curry (16) showed that the diffusive solute permeability to alpha -lactalbumin was lower during exposure to plasma [(Palpha -lactalbumin)plasma = 1.0 × 10-6 cm/s] than that during exposure to bovine serum albumin (BSA)-Ringer solution [(Palpha -lactalbumin)BSA = 5.0 × 10-6 cm/s]. Huxley et al. (17) further showed that (Palpha -lactalbumin)plasma/(Palpha -lactalbumin)BSA = 0.31, whereas there was no change in hydraulic conductivity (Lp). They concluded that the actions of plasma were to confer charge selectivity for anionic solutes and modify the porous pathways of the microvessel wall to a lesser extent. With the use of the same model as in Refs. 2 and 6, they predicted an increase in charge from 11.2 meq/l in the presence of albumin to 34 meq/l in the presence of plasma.

In another line of investigation into the mechanism of decreasing Palpha -lactalbumin by plasma protein, Adamson and Clough (1) tried to test the hypothesis that plasma protein may modulate surface glycocalyx structural properties. With the use of cationized ferritin staining, they found that the total glycocalyx thickness in the presence of plasma was twice the value of that with BSA-Ringer perfusion. Their interpretation for this was that the increase in the thickness of surface glycocalyx layer is the result of a change in the orientation of surface glycoproteins to which cationized ferritin binds.

Previously, a simple Donnan-type model was proposed to describe the charge effect on microvessel permeability (2, 6, 16, 17). It was based on a Donnan equilibrium distribution of ions, which exists as a result of retention of negative charges on the capillary membrane. It was suggested (8, 9) that the steric and electrostatic exclusions be described in terms of an effective partition coefficient (Phi eff)
<AR><R><C>&phgr;<SUB>eff</SUB> </C><C>= &phgr;<SUB>steric</SUB> exp(−<IT>Z&Dgr;EF</IT>/<IT>R</IT>T)</C></R><R><C></C><C>= &phgr;<SUB>steric</SUB> exp(−<IT>Z</IT>&Dgr;&psgr;)</C></R></AR> (1)
Here, Phi steric is the steric partition coefficient describing the size selectivity of the membrane, Delta E is the effective Donnan electrical potential difference across the membrane, Z is the charge on the solute, R is the universal gas constant, F is Faraday's constant, and T is temperature. RT/F is 25.2 mV at 20°C. Delta Psi is the dimensionless electrical potential difference and is equal to Delta EF/RT. With the use of this model, the fixed negative charge in the transport pathway in the frog mesentery (Cm) was estimated to be ~11 meq/l (2, 6, 17). Although this model described the steric and electrostatic partition to a charged solute at the interface between the membrane and the solution, it neglected the thickness of the membrane and thus neglected the steric and electrostatic interactions between the solutes and the membrane components within the membrane.

A more sophisticated model for steric and diffusion resistance to solute transport in the fiber matrix was proposed by Weinbaum et al. (22). With the use of this theory for the entrance fiber layer, Fu et al. (10-13) developed a three-dimensional model for the interendothelial cleft to describe solute exchange across the microvessel. Whereas this model could successfully explain the size-restricted transport of a solute through the surface glycocalyx and the interendothelial cleft, it did not consider the electrical charge factors of the glycocalyx layer and the solute. Therefore, it can only be applied to describe the transvascular transport of electroneutral molecules. Recently, an electrochemical model was proposed by Stace and Damiano (7, 20) for the transport of charged molecules through the capillary glycocalyx. However, this model did not consider transport through the cleft region.

In the current study, we attempted to develop a two-dimensional model incorporating both size and charge effects so that it will provide, for the first time, a quantitative analysis of various experimental results expected to be associated with negative charges in transvascular pathways. Compared with the model in Fu et al. (13), this model features two new characteristics: 1) the surface glycocalyx contains a negative electric charge, and 2) there is an interface between the surface glycocalyx layer and the cleft entrance (15). This model will help to better understand both the physical and electrochemical mechanisms of selectivity in the endothelial surface glycocalyx layer and therefore provide a new method for controlling transport rates of charged or uncharged molecules in drug delivery.


    MODEL DESCRIPTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

Model Geometry

The schematic of the new model geometry for the interendothelial cleft is shown in Fig. 1. -Lf < x < 0 is the surface glycocalyx layer represented by a periodic square array of cylindrical fibers, where Lf is the thickness of the entrance fiber matrix layer and x is the abscissa with the origin at the cleft entrance (Fig. 1). The radius of the fiber is a, and the gap spacing between the fibers is Delta . Ljun is the junction strand thickness. L1 and L3 are the depths between the junction strand and the luminal and abluminal fronts. L is the total length of the cleft. There are two types of pores in the junction strand, as proposed in Fu et al. (11-13), based on Adamson and Michel's observations (3). One is an infrequent large break of width 2d and height 2B. The distance between the adjacent large breaks is 2D; another is a continuous narrow slit of width 2bs. The effect of a narrow slit is neglected because the solute considered in this study, the diameter of which is 4.02 nm, cannot penetrate the slit of width 2bs, ~2 nm. The electric charge is assumed to only exist in the surface glycocalyx layer, and the charge density Cm(x) is assumed to have four distribution profiles, as shown in Fig. 2: 1) Cm(x) = constant = Cm0 (-Lf < x < 0), 2) Cm(x) = Cm0tanh(1 + x/Lf)/tanh(1) (-Lf < x < 0), 3) Cm(x) = Cm0tanh(-x/Lf)/tanh(1) (-Lf < x < 0), and 4) Cm(x) = Cm0tanh(2 + 2x/Lf)/tanh(1) (-Lf < x < -Lf/2); Cm0tanh(-2x/Lf)/tanh(1) (-Lf/2 < x < 0). These four profiles are chosen so that when the concentrations of cations (C+) and anions (C-) are equal in the solution, case 1 has an electrical partition at both interfaces between the glycocalyx layer and the lumen (x = -Lf)/cleft (x = 0), case 2 has a partition only at x = 0, whereas case 3 has a partition at x = -Lf, and case 4 has an electrical partition at none of the interfaces. Similar assumptions in Ref. 8 are used in the glycocalyx layer: 1) all charged solutes [ribonuclease, alpha -lactalbumin, and univalent cations (Na+ and anions, mainly Cl-)] obey a modified Nernst-Planck flux expression; 2) overall electroneutrality is satisfied everywhere; and 3) Donnan equilibria exist at the interfaces of the fiber layer between the vessel lumen (x = -Lf) and between the cleft entrance (x = 0).


View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   A: plane view of junction-orifice-fiber entrance layer model of interendothelial cleft. Junction strands with periodic openings lie parallel to the luminal front. Ljun, junction strand thickness; L1 and L3, distances between the junctional strand and luminal and abluminal fronts, respectively; 2D, spacing between adjacent breaks in the junctional strand. At the entrance of cleft on the luminal side, the surface glycocalyx is represented by a periodic square array of cylindrical fibers. a, Radius of these fibers; Delta , gap spacing between fibers; Lf, thickness of the glycocalyx layer. The charge density in the glycocalyx layer is Cm(x). C'i(x) and Ci(x) (x = -Lf, 0) are the concentrations of charged ions/molecules from the fiber side and from the lumen/cleft side, respectively, at the interfaces between the fiber layer and the lumen/cleft entrance. E'(x) and E(x) (x = -Lf, 0) are the corresponding electrical potentials at the interfaces. B: three-dimensional sketch of single periodic unit of width 2D showing a large orifice of width 2d and height 2B and a narrow slit of height 2bs in the junction strand (revised from Ref. 11).



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Hypothesized charge density profiles Cm(x) in the surface glycocalyx layer. The thickness of the glycocalyx layer under the normal condition is Lf = 100 nm (1, 10-13).

Mathematical Model

Entrance fiber matrix layer. As shown in Fig. 1, the glycocalyx (fiber matrix) layer lies in front of the cleft and covers the entire endothelial surface. The solution in the vessel lumen consists of monovalent cations (C+) and monovalent anions (C-) as well as a small amount of protein (e.g., albumin). The volume flux and flux of solute i are denoted by Jv and Ji, respectively. The concentrations of solute i and the electrical potential within the fiber matrix layer are denoted as C'i(x) and E'(x). At the interface of the vessel lumen and the fiber layer, Ci(-Lf) and E(-Lf) represent the concentration and electrical potential at x = -Lf from the lumen side and C'i(-Lf) and E'(Lf) from the fiber side. At the interface of the fiber layer and the cleft entrance, Ci(0) and E(0) represent the concentration and electrical potential at x = 0 from the cleft side and C'i(0) and E'(0) from the fiber side.

With the assumptions described in the model geometry and steady-state conditions, the governing equation for solute transport in the fiber layer can be written as
<FR><NU>d</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR><FENCE>−<IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB><FENCE><FR><NU>dC′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + <IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP></IT><FR><NU>d&psgr;′</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></FENCE> + <IT>K</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB><IT>J</IT><SUB>v</SUB> C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></FENCE> = 0 (2)
or
<FR><NU>dC′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + <FENCE><IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP></IT><FR><NU>d&psgr;′</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> − <FR><NU><IT>K</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB><IT>J</IT><SUB>v</SUB></NU><DE><IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB></DE></FR></FENCE>C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = <IT>A</IT> (2a)
where Psi ' = FE'/RT and is the dimensionless electrical potential, R is the universal gas constant, F is Faraday's constant, T is temperature, E' is the electrical potential, A is an arbitrary constant, and C'i is the solute concentration within fiber matrix. Di,f is the effective diffusion coefficient of solute i in the fiber matrix layer, which includes both steric hindrance and diffusive resistance of fibers. Zi is the molecular charge number of species i, and Ki,f is the hindrance factor or retardation coefficient of solute i in convection transport. Equation 2a is a modified form of the Nernst-Planck equation, with contributions to solute flux resulting from diffusion, ion migration, and convection.

We defined Pe and Pecharge as Pe = Ki,fJvLf/Di,f and Pecharge = Zi × dPsi '/dx × Lf. The dimensionless parameter Pe is often called the Peclet number, which is a measure of relative importance of convection and diffusion to the transport of a solute. Analogously, the dimensionless parameter Pecharge is a measure of the relative importance of ion migration and diffusion to transport of a charged solute. Under the experimental conditions for frog mesenteric capillaries (2, 10, 16, 17), the hydraulic conductivity (Lp) = 2.0 × 10-7 cm · s-1 · cmH2O-1, the effective filtration pressure across the microvessel wall (Delta p) < 5 cmH2O, the total length of the cleft per unit surface area of the microvessel (Ljt) = 2,000 cm/cm2, the cleft width 2B = 20 nm, and the entrance fiber layer thickness (Lf) = 100 nm; Pe = Ki,fJvLf/Di,f = (Ki,fLpDelta p/Ljt2B) × Lf/Di,f < 0.05 for a solute of radius 2.01 nm in the fiber layer (Ki,f = 0.65 and Di,f = 0.025 × 10-6 cm2/s; Refs. 10 and 22). If we neglect Pe, Eq. 2a can be rewritten as
<FR><NU>dC′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + <FR><NU>Pe<SUB>charge</SUB></NU><DE><IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB></DE></FR> C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = <IT>A</IT> (3)
The boundary conditions are
C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = C′<SUB><IT>i</IT>L</SUB>  at <IT>x</IT> = −<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> (3a)

C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(0, <IT>y</IT>)  at <IT>x</IT> = 0 (3b)
At the interface of the fiber layer and the cleft entrance
<IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB><FENCE><FR><NU>dC′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + <FR><NU>Pe<SUB>charge</SUB></NU><DE><IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB></DE></FR> C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></FENCE> = <IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,c</SUB> <FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(1)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>  at <IT>x</IT> = 0 (3c)
In Eq. 3c, C<UP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB><SUP>(1)</SUP></UP>(x, y) is the solute concentration in region 1 of the cleft. It is assumed that the resistance to transport at the glycocalyx-solution interfaces (x = -Lf and x = 0) is much smaller than that offered by the glycocalyx itself. Therefore, as shown in Ref. 8, there is a Donnan equilibrium relationship between the solute concentration in the fiber layer [C<UP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB><SUP>′</SUP></UP>(x)] and that at the lumen or the cleft side [Ci(x)]
C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) = C<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)<IT>e</IT><SUP>{<IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP></IT>[&psgr;(<IT>x</IT>) − &psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)]}</SUP>  at <IT>x</IT> = −<IT>L<SUB>f</SUB></IT> and <IT>x</IT> = 0 (4)
where Psi '(x) and Psi (x) are the dimensionless electrical potentials inside and outside the fiber layer, respectively. At the vessel lumen, Psi (-Lf) = 0, which is the reference potential.

By combining Eqs. 3, a and b, and 4, the solution of Eq. 3, which satisfies corresponding boundary conditions, is
C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = <IT>e</IT><SUP>−<IT>Z</IT>′&psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)</SUP> <FENCE>C<SUB><IT>i</IT>L</SUB> + <IT>A</IT> <LIM><OP>∫</OP><LL>−<IT>I</IT>,</LL><UL><IT>x</IT></UL></LIM> <IT>e</IT><SUP><IT>Z</IT>′&psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)</SUP> d<IT>x</IT></FENCE>  −<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> < <IT>x</IT> < 0 (5)

A = <FR><NU>C<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(0, <IT>y</IT>)<IT>e</IT><SUP><IT>Z</IT>′&psgr;(0)</SUP> − C<SUB><IT>i</IT>L</SUB></NU><DE><LIM><OP>∫</OP><LL>−<IT>L,</IT>f</LL><UL>0</UL></LIM> <IT>e</IT><SUP><IT>Z</IT>′&psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)</SUP> d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>
Here CiL is the solute concentration in the lumen, which is a constant. Ci(0, y) is the solute concentration at the cleft entrance x = 0, which can be obtained by jointly solving the governing equation in the cleft region. y is the vertical coordinate with the origin at the center line of a periodic unit of the cleft (Fig. 1). At the interface of the fiber layer and the cleft entrance (x = 0), Eq. 3c becomes
<FR><NU>D<SUB>i,c</SUB></NU><DE><IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,f</SUB></DE></FR> <FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(1)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> = <IT>A</IT> = <FR><NU>C<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(0, <IT>y</IT>)<IT>e</IT><SUP><IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP></IT>&psgr;(0)</SUP> − C<SUB><IT>i</IT>L</SUB></NU><DE><LIM><OP>∫</OP><LL>−<IT>I</IT>,f</LL><UL>0</UL></LIM> <IT>e</IT><SUP><IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP></IT>&psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)</SUP> d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>  at <IT>x</IT> = 0 (6)
For neutral solutes (Zi = 0), Eq. 6 reduces to the expression used in previous models for uncharged molecules (11-13).

Cleft region. Because there is no charge in cleft regions 1 and 3, and, in our case, Pe in the cleft [Pe = Ki,cJvL/Di,c = (Ki,cLpDelta p/Ljt2B) × L/Di,c] is in the order of 10-2 [the retardation coefficient (Ki,c) = 0.99, the diffusion coefficient of the solute in the cleft (Di,c) = 0.68 × 10-6 cm2/s, and the cleft depth (L) = 400 nm; Refs. 10, 13, and 22] for the solute of radius 2.01 nm, the governing equation for solute transport in the cleft region can be approximated by a steady two-dimensional diffusion equation averaged over the cleft height (11-13)
<FR><NU>∂<SUP>2</SUP>C<SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT><SUP>2</SUP></DE></FR> + <FR><NU>∂<SUP>2</SUP>C<SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>y</IT><SUP>2</SUP></DE></FR> = <IT>j</IT> = 1, 3 (7)
C<UP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB><SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP></UP>, where j = 1, 3, is the concentration in regions 1 and 3 of the cleft. Boundary conditions for Eq. 7 are
C<SUP>(1)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = C<SUP>(3)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>,  <FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(1)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> = <FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(3)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>  at <IT>x</IT> = <IT>L</IT><SUB>1</SUB>, ‖<IT>y</IT>‖ ≤ <IT>d</IT> (7a)

<FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> = 0,  <IT>j</IT> = 1, 3  at <IT>x</IT> = <IT>L</IT><SUB>1</SUB>, <IT>d</IT> < ‖<IT>y</IT>‖ ≤ <IT>D</IT> (7b)

C<SUP>(3)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = C<SUB><IT>i</IT>A</SUB>  at <IT>x</IT> = <IT>L</IT>, ‖<IT>y</IT>‖ ≤ <IT>D</IT> (7c)

<FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB></NU><DE>∂<IT>y</IT></DE></FR> = 0  <IT>j</IT> = 1, 3 at 0 ≤ <IT>x</IT> ≤ <IT>L</IT>, <IT>y</IT> = 0, <IT>D</IT> (7d)
Equation 6 is the interface boundary condition, which represents the conservation of mass from the fiber region to the cleft region. Boundary condition Eq. 7a shows the continuity across the junction break, and Eq. 7b indicates the impermeability of the rest part of the junction strand. Equation 7c indicates that concentration is a constant, CiA, at the tissue side of the cleft. Equation 7d is the symmetric boundary condition. To obtain the solution of Eq. 7 with boundary conditions Eq. 7, a-d, and interface condition Eq. 6, we first found Psi (0) and int <UP><SUB>0</SUB><SUP>−<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB></SUP></UP> eZi&PSgr;'(x)dx in Eq. 6 by solving modified Nernst-Planck equations for monovalent ion concentrations in the fiber layer. This process is shown in the APPENDIX. A numerical method similar to that in Hu and Weinbaum (15) was applied to solve for C<UP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB><SUP>(<IT>j</IT>)</SUP></UP>(x, y) in cleft regions 1 and 3. Finally, averaged <A><AC>C</AC><AC>&cjs1171;</AC></A>i(0) int <UP><SUB><IT>D</IT></SUB><SUP>−<IT>D</IT></SUP></UP> Ci(0, y)/2D dy was substituted into Eq. 5 for Ci(0, y) to obtain C<UP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB><SUP>′</SUP></UP>(x) in the fiber region. For the case presented in Hu and Weinbaum (15), due to the high filtration pressure (43 cmH2O), the high plasma oncotic pressure (26 cmH2O), and larger molecule albumin (radius = 3.55 nm), Pe is highly nonuniform along the y direction behind the surface fiber layer (x = 0). It can be as high as the order of 1 over the break region ( y  < d). Therefore, the contribution from filtration cannot be neglected in their case. However, in our case, the filtration pressure is <10 cmH2O, the plasma oncotic pressure is ~5 cmH2O (2, 10, 16, 17), and the largest Pe in the junction break is only ~0.3 for a solute of radius 2.01 nm (11). Neglecting the convection in our case is reasonable. In another work, we will present the convection effect as well as the charge effect when high filtration pressure occurs.

The diffusive permeability (P) of the microvessel to a solute is defined as
<IT>P</IT> = <FR><NU>Q<SUP>s</SUP><SUB>2<IT>D</IT></SUB></NU><DE>C<SUB><IT>i</IT>L</SUB> − C<SUB><IT>i</IT>A</SUB></DE></FR> <FR><NU><IT>L</IT><SUB>jt</SUB></NU><DE>2<IT>D</IT></DE></FR> (8)
Here, CiL and CiA are concentrations in the lumen and in the tissue space, Ljt is the total length of the cleft per unit surface area of the microvessel, and 2D is the distance between the adjacent junction breaks. Ljt/2D is the total number of the breaks per unit surface area of the microvessel. Q<UP><SUB>2<IT>D</IT></SUB><SUP>s</SUP></UP> is the solute mass flow rate through one junction break period, which is
Q<SUP>s</SUP><SUB>2<IT>D</IT></SUB> = 2<IT>B</IT> <LIM><OP>∫</OP><LL>−<IT>D</IT></LL><UL><IT>D</IT></UL></LIM> <IT>D</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT>,c</SUB> <FR><NU>∂C<SUP>(1)</SUP><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> (<IT>L</IT><SUB>1</SUB>, <IT>y</IT>)</NU><DE>∂<IT>x</IT></DE></FR>d<IT>y</IT> (9)

Parameter Values

Cleft and fiber layer geometry. Figure 1 shows the three-dimensional model for the interendothelial cleft and the charged surface fiber layer. Model parameters are determined according to experimental data for frog mesenteric capillaries (1, 3), which are the same as those in Fu et al. (13). The total cleft length L = 400 nm. The junction strand is in the middle of the cleft and its thickness, Ljun, which is in the order of 10 nm, can be neglected compared with L. Therefore, L1 = L3 = L/2 = 200 nm. The cleft height 2B = 20 nm. The large junction break width 2d = 150 nm, and the average spacing between the adjacent breaks is 2D = 2,640 nm. Because all of the charged solutes in the current study have a diameter of 4.02 nm, which is larger than the width of the small slit 2bs ~ 2 nm, the small slit is impermeable to these solutes. The total cleft length per unit area (Ljt) = 2,000 cm/cm2. In the entrance fiber matrix layer, both periodic and random fiber arrays were examined. We used fiber radius a = 0.6 nm and gap spacing Delta  = 7 nm if periodic fiber arrays exist or volume fraction of fiber matrix Sf = 0.11 if random fiber arrays exist. The values of Delta  or Sf lead to a diffusion coefficient of a solute with radius rs = 2.01 nm in the fiber matrix of Di,f = 0.025 × 10-6 cm2/s (13, 22).

Properties of ions and charged solutes. Two solutions were considered for ion concentration in the vessel lumen. The first was Ringer solution, whose composition was (in mM) 111 NaCl, 2.4 KCl, 1.0 MgSO4, 1.1 CaCl2, 0.195 NaHCO3, 5.5 glucose, and 5.0 HEPES (pH = 7.4). Ringer solution with 10 mg/ml BSA (molecular weight = 69,000) was the perfusate in the experiment (2, 5, 10, 16). At pH 7.4, the molecular charge of the albumin is about -19 (8). The charge density of albumin is 0.144 mM × 19 = 2.7 meq/l, which is negligible compared with the ion charge density (in the order of 100 meq/l). Thus, in Ringer solution, the cation concentration is taken as the same as that of anions: C+ = C- = 118 M.

Another solution was blood plasma. The concentration of plasma proteins in the vessel lumen was 1 mM, and the valency was assumed to be -17 (4). A simplified plasma has cations (155 mM Na+) and anions (138 mM Cl-) to satisfy electrical neutrality. Therefore, C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM in plasma.

On the tissue side of the fiber layer at the cleft entrance, we assumed a negligible concentration of proteins because the fiber layer behaves as the molecular filter to proteins (22). To satisfy the electrical neutrality, C+ should be identical to C- on the tissue side of the fiber layer, whose values are dependent on C+ and C- in the lumen as well as the charge density of the surface glycocalyx at the interface of the cleft entrance. These values are calculated using Eq. A3 in the APPENDIX at x = 0.

Because most of the cations are Na+ and most of the anions are Cl-, we used the diffusion coefficients of Na+ and Cl- as those for cations and anions, respectively: D+ = 1.506 × 10-5 cm2/s and D- = 1.999 × 10-5 cm2/s. These values of D+ and D- were calculated for T = 20°C using the values for T = 37°C given in Ref. 8. T of 20°C is the temperature in the experiments for measuring the permeability of frog mesenteric microvessels.

Dfree = 1.07 × 10-6 cm2/s and is the free diffusion coefficient of a solute with radius rs = 2.01 nm (both ribonuclease and alpha -lactalbumin) at T = 20°C. The corresponding diffusion coefficients in the cleft and in the fiber matrix layer are Di,c = 0.68 ×10-6 cm2/s and Di,f = 0.025 × 10-6 cm2/s, respectively (10, 22).


    RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

Electrical Potential Profiles

Figure 3 shows the electrical potential profiles across the surface glycocalyx layer. When the perfusate in the vessel lumen is Ringer solution, in which the cation and anion concentrations C+ = C- = 118 mM, the results are shown in Fig. 3A. Figure 3B shows the results for the plasma as the perfusate in which C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. The electrical potential is determined by the distribution of cations C+ and anions C- and the charge density Cm of the surface glycocalyx. In Fig. 3A, in both the lumen and cleft regions, C+ = C- = 118 mM. At the interface of the fiber layer and the lumen (x -Lf), for case 1, when Cm = Cm0 = 25 meq/l, there is a step decrease in electrical potential from its initial value of E(-Lf) = 0 to E'(-Lf) = -2.7 mV. Because Cm is constant across the fiber layer and Jv = 0, there is no change in E' within the fiber layer. At the interface of the fiber layer and the cleft entrance, there is a step increase in electrical potential from E'(0) = -2.7 mV to E(0) = 0. For case 2 of Cm(x) = Cm0 tanh (1 + x/Lf)/ tanh (1), where Cm(-Lf) = 0, there is no jump in E at x = -Lf, whereas E'(x) decreased from x = -Lf to 0 due to changes in Cm(x). At the interface between the fiber layer and cleft entrance, there is a step increase in electrical potential from E'(0) = -2.7 mV to E(0) = 0. For case 3 of Cm(x) = Cm0 tanh (-x/Lf) tanh (1), the change in the electrical potential is complementary to that of case 2. In case 3, there is a step decrease at x = -Lf, whereas E'(x) increases from x = -Lf to 0. At the interface between the fiber layer and cleft entrance, x = 0, there is no change in E. In case 4, when Cm(x) = Cm0 tanh (2 + 2x/Lf)/ tanh (1) (-Lf < x < -Lf/2), Cm(x) Cm0 tanh (-2x/Lf)/ tanh (1) (-Lf/2 < x < 0); there are no changes in E at both interfaces between the fiber layer and lumen/cleft entrance due to Cm(-Lf) = Cm(0) = 0 and C+ = C- in the lumen and in the cleft. E'(x) decreases first from x = -Lf to -Lf/2 and then increases from x = -Lf/2 to 0. At the interface of the fiber layer and the cleft, it returns to its initial value E(0) = E(-Lf) = 0. The difference between the maximum and the minimum in E, 2.7 mV, is the same for all the cases.


View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   Profiles of electrical potential E(x) in the surface glycocalyx layer for the corresponding charge density Cm(x) in Fig. 2. Electrical potential at x = -Lf from the lumen side E(-Lf) = 0 is the reference point. Case 1 is when Cm(x)/Cm0 = 1, case 2 is when Cm(x)/Cm0 = tanh (1 + x/Lf)/ tanh (1), case 3 is when Cm(x)/Cm0 = tanh (-x/Lf)/tanh (1), and case 4 is when Cm(x)/Cm0 = tanh (2 + 2x/Lf)/ tanh (1), -Lf < x < -Lf/2; Cm(x)/Cm0 = tanh (-2x/Lf)/ tanh(1), -Lf/2 < x < 0. Cm0 = 25 meq/l for all cases. A: ion concentrations in the lumen C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM; B: C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM.

In Fig. 3B, the perfusate in the lumen is plasma, in which C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. These unequal ion concentrations induce a large difference in electrical potential profiles, although the charge density distributions are the same as those shown in Fig. 3A. For case 1 of constant Cm = 25 meq/l, E decreases suddenly from 0 to -0.7 mV at x = -Lf, does not change across the entire fiber layer, and suddenly increases from -0.7 to 1.5 mV at x = 0. For case 2, in which Cm(-Lf) = 0, there is a sudden increase in E at x = -Lf from 0 to 1.5 mV; E then decreases gradually across the fiber layer to -0.7 mV at the fiber layer exit x = 0- and finally jumps to 1.5 mV at the entrance of the cleft x = 0+. For case 3, in which Cm(-Lf) = Cm0= 25 meq/l, there is a sudden decrease in E at x = -Lf from 0 to -0.7 mV; E then gradually increases across the fiber layer to 1.5 mV at x = 0. For case 4, in which Cm(-Lf) = 0, there is a sudden increase in E from 0 to 1.5 mV at x = -Lf; E then gradually decreases to -0.7 mV at x = -Lf/2 and increases to 1.5 mV at x = 0. The difference between the maximum and minimum in E is the same again for all the cases due to the same Cm0. However, the difference is 2.2 mV, when C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM, instead of 2.7 mV, when C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM.

As shown earlier, charges can affect molecular transport in two ways: 1) through the ion migration term in solute flux expression (the second term in Eq. 2), and 2) through electrostatic partitioning of charged solutes at interfaces (Eq. 4). For case 1 of constant Cm, dE'/dx = 0 (or dPsi '/dx = 0), the charge effect on the solute transport comes only from the electrostatic partition at two interfaces of the fiber layer (x = -Lf and x = 0). This partition is the same at both interfaces when C+ = C- = 118 mM, whereas the partition is larger at x = 0 when C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM in the lumen. For all cases of Cm = Cm(x), dE'/dx not equal  0 (or dPsi '/dx not equal  0), the charge contributes to the solute migration term in Eq. 2. Under the condition of C+ = C- = 118 mM, there is no partition at both interfaces for case 4, whereas there is a partition at x = -Lf for case 3 and a partition for case 2 at x = 0. Under the conditions of C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM, there is a partition at x = -Lf for cases 3 and 4 and partitions at two interfaces for case 2.

Concentration Distributions of Solutes

The dimensionless concentration distributions of positively charged ribonuclease (+3), negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin (-11), and a neutral solute (0) of same size are shown in Fig. 4. Figure 4A shows the cases when C+ = C- = 118 mM, and Fig. 4B shows the cases when C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. For a neutral solute that is not affected by charge, its dimensionless concentration (dotted line) decreased gradually from 1 in the lumen to 0.65 at the exit of the fiber layer. This decrease is due to the size effect, e.g., the steric hindrance and diffusion resistance of the fibers to the solute, and is the same under various charge densities (Cm) for the same size solute. Figure 4, top, shows the concentration distributions when Cm = constant = 25 meq/l, in which case there is no charge effect within the fiber layer (dE'/dx = 0). Under condition a, the concentration of positively charged ribonuclease (solid line) abruptly increased by electrical partition at x = -Lf, gradually decreased in the fiber layer due to the size effect, and abruptly decreased further at x = 0 due to electrical partition. For negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin (dashed line), the electrical partitions at interfaces provide an opposite effect from that for ribonuclease. Under condition b, due to unequal electrical potential differences at x = -Lf and x = 0 (see Fig. 3B), the electrical partitions are different from those in condition a. For example, the concentration of ribonuclease first increased from 1 to 1.08 at x = -Lf, gradually decreased to 0.76 across the fiber layer, and had a step decrease from 0.76 to 0.59 at x = 0. This value of 0.59 is even lower than the concentration for the neutral solute at the same location, which was 0.65. In contrast, the concentration of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin at x = 0 jumped from 0.32 to 0.83, which is higher than 0.65. This electrical partition [Psi (0) - Psi '(0) > 0; see Fig. 3B] favors the transport of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin (Eq. 4). This induces an interesting effect on total permeability of a microvessel to solutes with different charges, which will be shown in Fig. 5B.


View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   Dimensionless concentration distributions C(x)/CLumen in the surface glycocalyx layer for a positively charged molecule, ribonuclease (+3), a neutral solute (0), and a negatively charged molecule, alpha -lactalbumin (-11) for the four charge density distributions Cm(x) shown in Fig. 2. Cm0 = 25 meq/l for all cases. A: C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM; B: C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   Ratio of microvessel permeability for charged molecules (ribonuclease and alpha -lactalbumin) to that for a neutral solute with the same size (P/Pneutral) as a function of charge density Cm0 in the fiber matrix layer. Solid lines with circles and dashed lines with triangles are P/Pneutral for constant Cm. Dotted lines with squares and dashed-dotted lines with diamonds are P/Pneutral for varied Cm in the fiber layer, which are the same for all three distributions of Cm(x) shown in Fig. 2. A: C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM; B: C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM.

Figure 4, top middle, bottom middle, and bottom, show the cases when Cm = Cm(x), corresponding to those in Fig. 2. In these cases, dE'/dx no longer equals to zero, and there is a contribution from dE'/dx to the transport of the charged solutes within the fiber layer in addition to electrical partitions at the entrance and exit of the fiber layer. In cases 2 and 4, where Cm(-Lf) = 0, under condition a, when C+ = C- = 118 mM, there was no electrical partition at x = -Lf; the concentration is the same as that in the lumen for all solutes with and without charges. However, under condition b, when C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM, the electrical partition at x = -Lf favors the transport of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin instead of positively charged ribonuclease due to the positive jump in the electrical potential at x = -Lf (Fig. 3B). In cases 3 and 4, where Cm(0) = 0, there was no electrical partition at x = 0. Although concentration profiles in the fiber layer are varied for various Cm(x), the concentration at x = 0, the exit of the fiber layer, or the entrance of the cleft, is the same for all cases. Under condition a, the exit concentration for ribonuclease is 0.69; for alpha -lactalbumin, it is 0.49. Under condition b, the exit concentration is 0.57 for ribonuclease but 0.96 for alpha -lactalbumin. The higher the exit concentration, the lower the resistance of the fiber layer to a solute. Because the resistance of the cleft region is the same for ribonuclease, alpha -lactalbumin, and a neutral solute with the same size, the total resistance or permeability of the microvessel wall to a solute is the same for all Cm(x) shown in Fig. 2.

Charge Effect of Surface Glycocalyx Layer on Permeability

Figure 5 shows the ratio of charged solute permeability to neutral solute permeability of the same size as a function of the maximum value Cm0 in charge density Cm shown in Fig. 2. Solid lines with circles are the results for ribonuclease and the dashed lines with triangles are the results for alpha -lactalbumin when Cm = constant = Cm0 (case 1 in Fig. 2). The dotted lines with squares are the results for ribonuclease and the dashed-dotted lines with diamonds are the results for alpha -lactalbumin when Cm is Cm(x) (cases 2-4 in Fig. 2). Figure 5A shows the condition of C+ = C- = 118 mM, and Fig. 5B shows the conditions of C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. As discussed above, the permeability of the microvessel wall to a charged solute is identical for the different charge-density distributions Cm(x) shown in Fig. 2. However, the permeability of the microvessel with varied Cm = Cm(x) is different from that with constant Cm, although the maximum value Cm0 is the same. In general, the permeability under the constant Cm case is larger than that under varied Cm for positively charged ribonuclease but smaller for negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin. The reason for this is that the total charge of the surface glycocalyx for constant Cm is larger than that for varied Cm. The effect of varied maximum value Cm0 but fixed total charge is shown in Fig. 6.


View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6.   Ratio of permeability of positively charged ribonuclease to that of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin (Pribonuclease/Palpha -lactalbumin) as a function of charge density Cm0 in the fiber layer. Solid lines with circles and dashed-dotted lines with diamonds are Pribonuclease/ Palpha -lactalbumin for constant Cm. The total charge is the same for these lines, with Cm0 halved and Lf doubled for dashed-dotted lines. Dotted lines with triangles are Pribonuclease/Palpha -lactalbumin for varied Cm, which are the same for all three distributions of Cm(x) shown in Fig. 2. Dashed lines with squares are Pribonuclease/Palpha -lactalbumin from a previous Donnan-type model. A: C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM; B: C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM.

Comparison of Previous and Current Models

Figure 6 shows predictions of current and previous models for the ratio of ribonuclease permeability Pribonuclease to alpha -lactalbumin permeability Palpha -lactalbumin. Figure 6A shows C+ = C- = 118 mM, and Fig. 6B shows C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. The dashed lines with squares in Fig. 6, A and B, are the results from the previous Donnan-type model (Eq. 1), which was used in Refs. 2, 6, 16, and 17. This model neglected the thickness of the fiber layer and therefore neglected the steric and electrostatic interactions between solutes and the glycocalyx within the layer. The solid lines with circles, dashed-dotted lines with diamonds, and dotted lines with triangles are the current model results, when Cm = constant and Cm = Cm(x), correspondingly. The difference between the solid lines and dashed-dotted lines is that Cm0 in the dashed-dotted lines is one-half of that in the solid lines, but fiber layer thickness Lf is doubled to keep the same total charge. We can see from Fig. 6 that with the same total charge and charge distribution, the lower the maximum value Cm0 and the larger the charge effect. Figure 6 also shows that the previous model may overestimate the charge effect of the surface glycocalyx layer by ignoring the layer thickness.

Combined Effect of Charge and Thickness of the Glycocalyx Layer

The ratio of varied alpha -lactalbumin permeability P to its permeability under the condition of the zero-charge glycocalyx layer with thickness Lf = 100 nm is shown in Fig. 7, as a function of charge density Cm0 and fiber layer thickness Lf. Figure 7A shows C+ = C- = 118 mM, and Fig. 7B shows C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM. Obviously, alpha -lactalbumin permeability P decreases with increasing fiber layer thickness Lf. When Lf is increased from 100 to 400 nm, the reduction in Palpha -lactalbumin is always ~50-70% no matter how much Cm0 is in both conditions a and b. With increasing Cm0, the relative decreasing effect of Lf becomes larger.


View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7.   Dimensionless permeability of alpha -lactalbumin (P/PLf = 100 nm, Cm0 = 0) as a function of fiber layer thickness Lf and fiber charge density Cm(x). Cm(x) can be any one of three distributions for varied Cm in Fig. 2. A: C+ = 118 mM and C- = 118 mM; B: C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM.


    DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

The combined junction-orifice-fiber matrix model in Ref. 13 demonstrated previously that the endothelial surface glycocalyx and the junction strands in the interendothelial cleft provided significant size restriction to the diffusion of intermediate-sized solutes across the walls of continuous microvessels of the frog mesentery. The results of our current model demonstrate that both solute charge and charge carried by the surface glycocalyx also determine the selectivity of the microvessel wall. The model predictions conform to the hypothesis that under previous experimental conditions, the fixed negative charge within transcapillary pathways for intermediate-sized proteins restricts the transport of negatively charged solutes more, relative to positively charged solutes of the same size. However, this effect is counteracted to some extent if the solution on the luminal side contains negatively charged proteins that cannot enter the layer.

From Fig. 6A, to account for the twofold difference in Pribonuclease and Palpha -lactalbumin observed in Ref. 2 under Ringer-BSA perfusion, Cm0 would be ~25 meq/l for the case of charge density Cm = constant (case 1 in Fig. 2) and Cm0 would be ~35 meq/l for cases of varied Cm = Cm(x) (cases 2-4 in Fig. 2). These values are significantly larger than 11 meq/l, the prediction from the previous electric partition-only model (2). Under the condition of orosomucoid perfusion, the increased ratio of Pribonuclease to Palpha -lactalbumin from two to six and the decrease in Palpha -lactalbumin to 0.47 of Palpha -lactalbumin under Ringer-BSA perfusion (6) could be explained if Cm0 increased from ~25 to ~55 meq/l for case 1 and from ~35 to ~75 meq/l for cases 2-4, a roughly twofold increase. The prediction of the previous model was from 11 to 28 meq/l (6). The change in Palpha -lactalbumin by plasma, to 0.31 of Palpha -lactalbumin under Ringer-BSA perfusion, observed in Huxley et al. (17) could be accounted for if Cm0 increased from ~25 to ~60 meq/l for case 1 and from ~35 to ~80 meq/l for cases 2-4. The previous model predicted that Cm0 was increased from 11 to 34 meq/l. Because of the thickness of the glycocalyx layer was ignored, the simple Donnan-type model used previously may overestimate the charge effect of the fiber matrix.

Figure 4 shows the dimensionless concentration distribution in the glycocalyx layer for ribonuclease with a net charge +3, alpha -lactalbumin with a net charge -11, and a neutral solute with the same size. When C+ = C- = 118 mM, for cases 1 and 3, there is a charge partition at the entrance of the glycocalyx layer (x = -Lf), which favors the passage of positively charged ribonuclease; there is no charge partition for cases 2 and 4. When C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM, the charge partition at the entrance of the glycocalyx layer still favors the transport of ribonuclease in cases 1 and 3; however, in cases 2 and 4, the partition favors the negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin. The reason for this is that the electrical potential E across the interface (x = -Lf or x = 0), which determines the charge partition, not only depends on charge density Cm(x) of the glycocalyx layer but also on the concentrations of cations C+ and anions C- in the lumen and cleft (Fig. 3). This dependence of E on Cm(x), as well as C+ and C-, induces the dependence of the solute permeability P on the solute charge and the charge density Cm(x) of the glycocalyx, as well as C+ and C-, which brings us the interesting phenomenon shown in Fig. 5B.

Despite the various concentration distributions (Fig. 4) due to different profiles of charge density Cm(x) within the glycocalyx layer, the concentrations of charged solutes are the same at the entrance of the cleft behind the glycocalyx layer for cases 2-4, provided that these density profiles have the same maximum value Cm0 and the same total charge (Fig. 2). For this sake, the overall solute permeability across the microvessel wall including the surface glycocalyx layer and the cleft region is identical regardless of Cm(x) profiles. If we keep the same maximum value Cm0, the larger the total charge of fibers, the larger the charge effect. In contrast, for the same total charge, the larger the Cm0, the smaller the charge effect. These results are shown in Fig. 6.

Figure 5 shows the ratio of Pribonuclease to Pneutral solute and the ratio of Palpha -lactalbumin to Pneutral solute as a function of Cm0, the maximum value of charge density in the glycocalyx layer. When proteins exist in the plasma, there are unequal concentrations of cations (Na+) and anions (Cl-) in the lumen, C+ = 155 mM and C- = 138 mM (4). Figure 5B shows that when Cm0 < 35 meq/l for constant Cm, and Cm0 < 55 meq/l for varied Cm(x), the permeability P of negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin is higher than that of positively charged ribonuclease, although the surface glycocalyx carries negative charges. As discussed above, this phenomenon is due to the dependence of P not only on solute charge and charge density of the fiber matrix Cm(x), but also on C+ and C-. In particular, if Cm0 is small, the negative charge in the layer is not enough to overcome the favored electrical partition to negatively charged alpha -lactalbumin due to the presence of negatively charged proteins in the lumen. This prediction may be used in controlled drug delivery by locally modulating Cm(x), C+, and C- for a certain drug with fixed charge.

In plasma perfusion compared with albumin perfusion, the thickness of the glycocalyx is greatly increased (1). We tested the combined effect of charge and thickness of the glycocalyx on Palpha -lactalbumin in Fig. 7. When charge density Cm0 is in the range of 25-35 meq/l, as predicted by our model during albumin perfusion, the twofold increase in fiber thickness Lf from 100 nm (albumin perfusion) to 200 nm (plasma perfusion) (1) would only decrease Palpha -lactalbumin by ~33%, not enough to account for the ~70% decrease observed in Ref. 15. However, if we additionally increase Cm0 by twofold, the combined effect of increasing both charge density Cm0 and the thickness Lf would account for the 70% decrease in Palpha -lactalbumin.

In summary, we developed a two-dimensional model incorporating the charge effects of the endothelial surface glycocalyx so that it can provide a more detailed quantitative analysis of various experimental results expected to be associated with negative charge in transvascular pathways. This will also help understand the physical mechanisms of glycocalyx selectivity and provide a new method for controlling transport rates of charged solutes in drug delivery. In the current study, we only analyzed the case when the hydraulic conductivity Lp of the microvessel and the pressure difference across the vessel wall Delta p are normal; the convection effect due to enhanced Lp and Delta p will be discussed in our next study.


    APPENDIX
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

This appendix shows the equations used to calculate the electrical potential profiles in the surface glycocalyx layer [Psi '(x)] and to find Psi '(0) and int <UP><SUB>0</SUB><SUP>−<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB></SUP></UP> eZiPsi '(x)dx in Eq. 5. It was assumed that overall electroneutrality is satisfied in the glycocalyx layer
<LIM><OP>∑</OP><LL><IT>i</IT></LL></LIM> <IT>Z</IT><SUP><IT>i</IT></SUP>C′<SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) − <IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) = 0  − <IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> < <IT>x</IT> < 0  <IT>i</IT> = +, −, TS<SUB>s</SUB> (A1)
Here, C'i is concentration of positive (i = +) and negative (i = -) monovalent ions and charged macromolecules [i = test solute (TS)] in the glycocalyx layer and Zi is the corresponding electrical valence. Equation A1 indicates that the negative charge Cm(x) carried by the fiber matrix must be balanced by an excess of mobile positive ions. Usually, the concentration of charged macromolecules is negligible compared with the concentrations of ions (see Parameter Values), and Eq. A1 reduces to the balance between monovalent cations (Z+ = +1) and the summation of monovalent anions (Z- = -1) and negative charges of the fiber matrix
C′<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) = C′<SUB>−</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) + <IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)  −<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> < <IT>x</IT> < 0 (A2)
At the interface between the fiber layer and lumen (x = -Lf in Fig. 1) and at that between the fiber layer and cleft entrance (x = 0), the Donnan equilibrium is satisfied. This gives Eq. 4 in the main text, which is
&psgr;(<IT>x</IT>) − &psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>) = ln <FENCE><FR><NU>C′<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</NU><DE>C<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</DE></FR></FENCE> = ln <FENCE><FR><NU>C<SUB>−</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</NU><DE>C′<SUB>−</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</DE></FR></FENCE>  <IT>x</IT> = −<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> and <IT>x</IT> = 0
Combining Eqs. 4 and A2 gives
C′<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) = <FR><NU><IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) + <RAD><RCD><IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)<SUP>2</SUP> + 4C<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)C<SUB>−</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</RCD></RAD></NU><DE>2</DE></FR> (A3)

  <IT>x</IT> = −<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB> and <IT>x</IT> = 0
The condition for no electrical current flows across the glycocalyx layer is
<LIM><OP>∑</OP><LL><IT>i</IT></LL></LIM> <IT>Z<SUP>i</SUP>J</IT><SUB><IT>i</IT></SUB> = 0  <IT>i</IT> = +, −, TS (A4)
Neglecting the current due to the macromolecules, Eq. A4 reduces to
J<SUB>+</SUB> = <IT>J</IT><SUB>−</SUB> (A5)
Under normal conditions in frog mesenteric capillaries, Lp = 2.0 × 10-7 cm · s-1 · cmH2O-1, Delta p ~ 5 cmH2O, Ljt = 2,000 cm/cm2, 2B = 20 nm, and Lf = 100 nm, so that Pe =JvLf/Di,f = (LpDelta p/Ljt2B) × Lf/Di,f approx  10-3 for both monovalent cations and anions. Di,f approx  D+ for cations and Di,f approx  D- for anions. The modified Nernst-Planck equations written for positive and negative ions are
J<SUB>+</SUB> = −f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><FENCE><FR><NU>dC′<SUB>+</SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + C′<SUB>+</SUB> <FR><NU>d&psgr;′</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR></FENCE> (A6)

J<SUB>−</SUB> = −f<IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB><FENCE><FR><NU>dC′<SUB>−</SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> − C′<SUB>−</SUB> <FR><NU>d&psgr;′</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR></FENCE> (A7)
Here, f is the void volume of the fiber matrix; f = 0.98 in our case (13, 22). The conditions of electroneutrality (Eq. A2) and zero current flow (Eq. A5) can be used to eliminate C'- and J- from Eqs. A6 and A7 so that
<FR><NU>dC′<SUB>+</SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> = <FR><NU>−<IT>J</IT><SUB>+</SUB>[C′<SUB>+</SUB><IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB> + (C′<SUB>+</SUB> − <IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>)<IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB>] + f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB>C′<SUB>+</SUB> <FR><NU>d<IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR></NU><DE>f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB> (2C′<SUB>+</SUB> − <IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>)</DE></FR> (A8)

<FR><NU>d&psgr;′</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> = <FR><NU><IT>J</IT><SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB> − <IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB>) − f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB> <FR><NU>d<IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB></NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR></NU><DE>f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><IT>D</IT><SUB>−</SUB>(2C′<SUB>+</SUB> − <IT>C</IT><SUB>m</SUB>)</DE></FR> (A9)
Equation A8 is solved for C<UP><SUB>+</SUB><SUP>′</SUP></UP>(x) by numerical integration, with initial values of C<UP><SUB>+</SUB><SUP>′</SUP></UP> at x = -Lf obtained from Eq. A3. Substituting obtained C<UP><SUB>+</SUB><SUP>′</SUP></UP>(x) into Eq. A9 and Psi '(x) is solved by numerical integration with Psi '(-Lf) from Eqs. 4 and A3. An iterative procedure was used, with values of J+ adjusted until the following relation was satisfied by
<FENCE><FR><NU><IT>J</IT><SUB>+</SUB>(−<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB>) − <IT>J</IT><SUB>+</SUB>(0)</NU><DE><IT>J</IT><SUB>+</SUB>(−<IT>L</IT><SUB>f</SUB>)</DE></FR></FENCE> ≤ 10<SUP>−5</SUP>
where
J<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>) = −f<IT>D</IT><SUB>+</SUB><FENCE><FR><NU>dC′<SUB>+</SUB>(<IT>x</IT>)</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR> + C′<SUB>+</SUB> <FR><NU>d&psgr;′(<IT>x</IT>)</NU><DE>d<IT>x</IT></DE></FR></FENCE>


    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by National Cancer Institute Grant R15-CA-86847-01 and University of Nevada (Las Vegas, NV) New Investigator Awards and Applied Research Initiative grants.


    FOOTNOTES

Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: B. M. Fu, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering and Cancer Institute, Univ. of Nevada, 4505 Maryland Pkwy., Box 454027, Las Vegas, NV 89154 (E-mail: bmfu{at}nscee.edu).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

First published December 12, 2002;10.1152/ajpheart.00467.2002

Received 4 June 2002; accepted in final form 11 December 2002.


    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MODEL DESCRIPTION
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
APPENDIX
REFERENCES

1.   Adamson, RH, and Clough G. Plasma proteins modify the endothelial cell glycocalyx of frog mesenteric microvessels. J Physiol 445: 473-486, 1992[Abstract/Free Full Text].

2.   Adamson, RH, Huxley VH, and Curry FE. Single capillary permeability to proteins having similar size but different charge. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 254: H304-H312, 1988[Abstract/Free Full Text].

3.   Adamson, RH, and Michel CC. Pathways through the inter-cellular clefts of frog mesenteric capillaries. J Physiol 466: 303-327, 1993[Abstract/Free Full Text].

4.   Curry, FE. Mechanics and thermodynamics of transcapillary exchange. In: Handbook of Physiology. The Cardiovascular System. Microcirculation. Bethesda, MD: Am. Physiol. Soc, 1984, sect. 2, vol. IV, pt. 1, chapt. 8, p. 309-374.

5.   Curry, FE. Regulation of water and solute exchange in microvessel endothelium: studies in single perfused capillaries. Microcirculation 1: 11-26, 1994[Medline].

6.   Curry, FE, Rutledge JC, and Lenz JF. Modulation of microvessel wall charge by plasma glycoprotein orosomucoid. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 257: H1354-H1359, 1989[Abstract/Free Full Text].

7.   Damiano, ER, and Stace TM. A mechano-electrochemical model of radial deformation of the capillary glycocalyx. Biophys J 82: 1153-1175, 2002[Web of Science][Medline].

8.   Deen, WM, Behrooz S, and Jamieson JM. Theoretical model for glomerular filtration of charged solutes. Am J Physiol Renal Fluid Electrolyte Physiol 238: F126-F139, 1980[Abstract/Free Full Text].

9.   Friedman, MH. Principles and Models of Biological Transport. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 1986, chapt. 1, p. 1-19.

10.   Fu, BM, Adamson RH, and Curry FE. Test of a two pathway model for small solute exchange across the capillary wall. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 274: H2062-H2073, 1998[Abstract/Free Full Text].

11.   Fu, BM, Curry FE, Adamson RH, and Weinbaum S. A model for interpreting the tracer labeling of interendothelial clefts. Ann Biomed Eng 25: 375-397, 1997[Web of Science][Medline].

12.   Fu, BM, Curry FE, and Weinbaum S. A diffusion wake model for tracer ultrastructure-permeability studies in microvessels. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 269: H2124-H2140, 1995[Abstract/Free Full Text].

13.   Fu, BM, Weinbaum S, Tsay RY, and Curry FE. A junction-orifice-fiber entrance layer model for capillary permeability: application to frog mesenteric capillaries. J Biomech Eng 116: 502-513, 1994[Web of Science][Medline].

14.   Gingell, D. Mammalian Cell Membranes, edited by Jamieson GA, and Robinson DM.. Boston, MA: Butterworths, 1976, vol. 1, p. 198-223.

15.   Hu, X, and Weinbaum S. A new view of Starling's hypothesis at the microstructural level. Microvasc Res 58: 281-304, 1999[Web of Science][Medline].

16.   Huxley, VH, and Curry FE. Differential actions of albumin and plasma on capillary solute permeability. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 260: H1645-H1654, 1991[Abstract/Free Full Text].

17.   Huxley, VH, Curry FE, Powers MR, and Thipakorn B. Differential action of plasma and albumin on transcapillary exchange of anionic solute. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 264: H1428-H1437, 1993[Abstract/Free Full Text].

18.   Schneeberger, EE, and Hamelin M. Interaction of circulating proteins with pulmonary endothelial glycocalyx and its effect on endothelial permeability. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 247: H206-H217, 1984[Abstract/Free Full Text].

19.   Simionescu, M, Simionescu N, Silbert JE, and Palade GE. Differentiated microdomains on the luminal surface of the capillary endothelium: partial characterization of their anionic sites. J Cell Biol 90: 614-621, 1981[Abstract/Free Full Text].

20.   Stace, TM, and Damiano ER. An electrochemical model of the transport of charged molecules through the capillary glycocalyx. Biophys J 80: 1670-1690, 2001[Web of Science][Medline].

21.   Vink, H, and Duling BR. Identification of distinct luminal domains for macromolecules, erythrocytes, and leukocytes within mammalian capillaries. Circ Res 79: 581-589, 1996[Abstract/Free Full Text].

22.   Weinbaum, S, Tsay R, and Curry FE. A three-dimensional junction-pore-matrix model for capillary permeability. Microvasc Res 44: 85-111, 1992[Web of Science][Medline].


Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 284(4):H1240-H1250
0363-6135/03 $5.00 Copyright © 2003 the American Physiological Society



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol.Home page
P. Guo, S. D. Hillyard, and B. M. Fu
A two-barrier compartment model for volume flow across amphibian skin
Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol, December 1, 2003; 285(6): R1384 - R1394.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
284/4/H1240    most recent
00467.2002v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (5)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fu, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fu, B. M.
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online