scholarly journals Ischemic preconditioning suppresses the noradrenaline turnover in the rat heart

1998 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Takasaki
Author(s):  
Ritesh Kumar Srivastav ◽  
Tarique Mahmood Ansari ◽  
Mahesh Prasad ◽  
Vishal Kumar Vishwakarma ◽  
Prabhat Kumar Upadhyay ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 579 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 246-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amir Reza Hajrasouliha ◽  
Sina Tavakoli ◽  
Mehdi Ghasemi ◽  
Pejman Jabehdar-Maralani ◽  
Hamed Sadeghipour ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 263 (4) ◽  
pp. H1107-H1112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. Liu ◽  
J. M. Downey

We examined the anti-infarct effect of ischemic preconditioning in the rat heart. All hearts were subjected to 30 min of regional coronary ischemia and 2 h of reperfusion. Infarct size was determined by tetrazolium. The control group had an average infarct size of 31% of the risk zone. Three 5-min cycles of preconditioning ischemia limited the infarct size to 3.7%. Neither the adenosine receptor blocker PD 115,199 nor the ATP-sensitive potassium channel blocker, glibenclamide, could block this protection. Intracoronary adenosine A1-receptor agonist 2-chloro-N6-cyclopentyladenosine offered a significant anti-infarct protection to the isolated rat heart, however. Although one 5-min cycle of preconditioning did not protect the rat heart from infarction (31% infarction in risk zone), it did attenuate arrhythmias. We conclude that 1) the rat heart can be preconditioned, which argues against mitochondrial adenosinetriphosphatase being the mechanism of preconditioning; 2) the threshold for preconditioning is higher in rat than rabbit or dog; 3) a role for adenosine in preconditioning was only partially supported; and 4) a role for ATP-sensitive potassium channels was not supported.


1999 ◽  
Vol 276 (1) ◽  
pp. H224-H234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong-Zhen Qian ◽  
Nelson L. Bernardo ◽  
Mohammed A. Nayeem ◽  
Jeya Chelliah ◽  
Rakesh C. Kukreja

Ischemic preconditioning (PC) induces delayed phase of protection, known as the second window of protection (SWOP). We investigated this phenomenon in rat and correlated it with the expression of 72-kDa heat shock protein (HSP 72). Rats were preconditioned with 1, 2, and 3 cycles of 5-min left anterior descending artery occlusions, each separated by a 10-min reperfusion (PC × 1, PC × 2 and PC × 3, respectively). Another group of rats was preconditioned with heat shock (HS) by raising temperature to 42°C for 15 min. Twenty-four hours later, rats were given sustained ischemia for 30 min and 90 min of reperfusion. Infarct sizes (%risk area) were 40.0 ± 7.5, 37.6 ± 5.6, and 47.6 ± 2.4 (mean ± SE) for PC × 1, PC × 2, and PC × 3 hearts, respectively, which were not different from the sham (49.9 ± 3.9, P > 0.05). In contrast, infarct size was reduced from 47.5 ± 3.8% in sham to 4.7 ± 2.3% ( P < 0.01) 24 h after HS. Additionally, early PC significantly reduced infarct size from 47.5 ± 3.8% in controls to 6.0 ± 1.2 and 5.0 ± 1.1% with PC × 1 and PC × 3. Repeated PC cycles induced over a threefold increase in HSP 70 mRNA after 2 h compared with sham ( P < 0.05). HSP 72, which increased 24 h after PC or HS, was not significantly different between the two PC stimuli. We conclude that PC does not induce SWOP in rat heart despite enhanced expression of HSP 72. In contrast, HS-induced delayed protection was associated with enhanced accumulation of HSP 72. It is possible that SWOP and HS have distinct mechanisms of protection that may not be exclusively related to HSP 72 expression.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document