The re-introduction of ischemic preconditioning is able to protect myocardium after repeated long reperfusion intervals.

Cardioscience Pub Date : 1994-12-01
E K Iliodromitis, D T Kremastinos, I Bouris, C Papadopoulos, I A Paraskevaidis, D M Yellon
{"title":"The re-introduction of ischemic preconditioning is able to protect myocardium after repeated long reperfusion intervals.","authors":"E K Iliodromitis,&nbsp;D T Kremastinos,&nbsp;I Bouris,&nbsp;C Papadopoulos,&nbsp;I A Paraskevaidis,&nbsp;D M Yellon","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Classic ischemic preconditioning confers protection to the vulnerable myocardium following brief periods of ischemia with short intermittent periods of reperfusion. The aims of this study were: (i) to ascertain the protection from preconditioning using a relatively long reperfusion interval; (ii) to see whether this protection exists if preconditioning and long reperfusion is repeated and (iii) to evaluate the effect that an additional preconditioning stimulus has if it is given immediately before the sustained ischemia. Following anesthesia, in-vivo hearts were preconditioned with a 5 minute coronary ligation followed by 10 minutes reperfusion (Group A). This was compared to groups that were preconditioned with 5 minutes ischemia and 1 hour reperfusion (Group B); or 5 minutes ischemia with 1 hour reperfusion, repeated twice (Group C); or 5 minutes ischemia with 1 hour reperfusion repeated twice and followed by 5 minutes ischemia and 10 minutes reperfusion (Group D). Protection was assessed by subjecting each of the above groups to a further 45 minutes of regional ischemia followed by 120 minutes reperfusion. This protocol without prior preconditioning served as a control (Group E). The ratio of the infarcted to risk area was 23.1 +/- 4.1% in group A, 38.3 +/- 3.5% in group B, 58.4 +/- 4.9% in group C, 10.4 +/- 3.1% in group D and 61.8 +/- 6.2% in the control group E. Group D was significantly different from all the other groups. Group B was not different in comparison to the control group E. When a relatively long reperfusion period (Group B) was introduced the preconditioning protection diminished. When this long reperfusion period was repeated (Group C) overall protection was lost. However, when preconditioning was re-introduced alter a long delay (Group D), the protection afforded by it not only returned but appeared to be potentiated.</p>","PeriodicalId":9629,"journal":{"name":"Cardioscience","volume":"5 4","pages":"277-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardioscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Classic ischemic preconditioning confers protection to the vulnerable myocardium following brief periods of ischemia with short intermittent periods of reperfusion. The aims of this study were: (i) to ascertain the protection from preconditioning using a relatively long reperfusion interval; (ii) to see whether this protection exists if preconditioning and long reperfusion is repeated and (iii) to evaluate the effect that an additional preconditioning stimulus has if it is given immediately before the sustained ischemia. Following anesthesia, in-vivo hearts were preconditioned with a 5 minute coronary ligation followed by 10 minutes reperfusion (Group A). This was compared to groups that were preconditioned with 5 minutes ischemia and 1 hour reperfusion (Group B); or 5 minutes ischemia with 1 hour reperfusion, repeated twice (Group C); or 5 minutes ischemia with 1 hour reperfusion repeated twice and followed by 5 minutes ischemia and 10 minutes reperfusion (Group D). Protection was assessed by subjecting each of the above groups to a further 45 minutes of regional ischemia followed by 120 minutes reperfusion. This protocol without prior preconditioning served as a control (Group E). The ratio of the infarcted to risk area was 23.1 +/- 4.1% in group A, 38.3 +/- 3.5% in group B, 58.4 +/- 4.9% in group C, 10.4 +/- 3.1% in group D and 61.8 +/- 6.2% in the control group E. Group D was significantly different from all the other groups. Group B was not different in comparison to the control group E. When a relatively long reperfusion period (Group B) was introduced the preconditioning protection diminished. When this long reperfusion period was repeated (Group C) overall protection was lost. However, when preconditioning was re-introduced alter a long delay (Group D), the protection afforded by it not only returned but appeared to be potentiated.

缺血预适应的重新引入对反复长时间再灌注后的心肌具有保护作用。
经典的缺血预处理能在短时间缺血和短间歇再灌注后保护脆弱的心肌。本研究的目的是:(i)确定相对较长的再灌注间隔对预处理的保护作用;(ii)如果预处理和长时间再灌注重复进行,观察这种保护是否存在;(iii)如果在持续缺血之前立即给予额外的预处理刺激,评估其效果。麻醉后,对体内心脏进行5分钟冠状动脉结扎和10分钟再灌注预处理(a组)。与5分钟缺血和1小时再灌注预处理组(B组)进行比较;或缺血5 min再灌注1 h,重复2次(C组);或5分钟缺血,1小时再灌注重复两次,然后5分钟缺血,10分钟再灌注(D组)。通过使上述各组再进行45分钟局部缺血,然后再灌注120分钟来评估保护作用。以无预处理方案为对照(E组),a组梗死区与危险区之比为23.1 +/- 4.1%,B组为38.3 +/- 3.5%,C组为58.4 +/- 4.9%,D组为10.4 +/- 3.1%,E组为61.8 +/- 6.2%。B组与对照组相比无显著差异。当引入较长再灌注时间(B组)时,预处理保护作用减弱。当重复这个长时间的再灌注时(C组),整体保护丧失。然而,当经过长时间的延迟后重新引入预处理(D组),它所提供的保护不仅恢复,而且似乎增强了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信