4.7 Article

No Direct Postconditioning Effect of Poloxamer 188 on Mitochondrial Function after Ischemia Reperfusion Injury in Rat Isolated Hearts

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22094879

Keywords

ATP synthesis; calcium retention capacity; cardiac; cardiac arrest; copolymer; mitochondria; myocardial infarction; oxygen consumption; P188; PEG

Funding

  1. US Department of Veterans Affairs Biomedical Laboratory RD Service [I01 BX003482]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study showed that P188 postconditioning did not directly improve mitochondrial function in the heart in the ex-vivo IR injury model. Neither further P188 nor PEG induced direct mitochondrial protection after IR injury in this model.
Myocardial infarction is a leading cause for morbidity and mortality worldwide. The only viable treatment for the ischemic insult is timely reperfusion, which further exacerbates myocardial injury. Maintaining mitochondrial function is crucial in preserving cardiomyocyte function in ischemia reperfusion (IR) injury. Poloxamer (P) 188 has been shown to improve cardiac IR injury by improving cellular and mitochondrial function. The aim of this study was to show if P188 postconditioning has direct protective effects on mitochondrial function in the heart. Langendorff prepared rat hearts were subjected to IR injury ex-vivo and reperfused for 10 min with 1 mM P188 vs. vehicle. Cardiac mitochondria were isolated with 1 mM P188 vs. 1 mM polyethylene glycol (PEG) vs. vehicle by differential centrifugation. Mitochondrial function was assessed by adenosine triphosphate synthesis, oxygen consumption, and calcium retention capacity. Mitochondrial function decreased significantly after ischemia and showed mild improvement with reperfusion. P188 did not improve mitochondrial function in the ex-vivo heart, and neither further P188 nor PEG induced direct mitochondrial protection after IR injury in this model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available