4.6 Article

Knockout of Angiotensin AT2 receptors accelerates healing but impairs quality

Journal

AGING-US
Volume 7, Issue 12, Pages 1185-1197

Publisher

IMPACT JOURNALS LLC
DOI: 10.18632/aging.100868

Keywords

Angiotensin; AT(1)R; AT(2)R; TGF

Funding

  1. Johns Hopkins Older Americans Independence Center National Institute on Aging [P30 AG021334]
  2. National Institute on Aging [1R01AG046441, K23 AG035005]
  3. Nathan Shock in Aging Scholarship Award
  4. Wound healing society foundation 3M scholarship
  5. NIH [HL58205, S10 OD016374]
  6. [R21AG043284]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wounds are among the most common, painful, debilitating and costly conditions in older adults. Disruption of the angiotensin type 1 receptors (AT(1)R), has been associated with impaired wound healing, suggesting a critical role for AT(1)R in this repair process. Biological functions of angiotensin type 2 receptors (AT(2)R) are less studied. We investigated effects of genetically disrupting AT(2)R on rate and quality of wound healing. Our results suggest that AT(2)R effects on rate of wound closure depends on the phase of wound healing. We observed delayed healing during early phase of wound healing (inflammation). An accelerated healing rate was seen during later stages (proliferation and remodeling). By day 12, fifty percent of AT(2)R(-/-) mice had complete wound closure as compared to none in either C57/BL6 or AT(1)R(-/-) mice. There was a significant increase in AT(1)R, TGF beta(1) and TGF beta(2) expression during the proliferative and remodeling phases in AT(2)R(-/-) mice. Despite the accelerated closure rate, AT(2)R(-/-) mice had more fragile healed skin. Our results suggest that in the absence of AT(2)R, wound healing rate is accelerated, but yielded worse skin quality. Elucidating the contribution of both of the angiotensin receptors may help fine tune future intervention aimed at wound repair in older individuals.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available