4.5 Article

Changes in vasoactive pathways in congenital diaphragmatic hernia associated pulmonary hypertension explain unresponsiveness to pharmacotherapy

Journal

RESPIRATORY RESEARCH
Volume 18, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-017-0670-2

Keywords

Nitric oxide; Endothelin; Prostacyclin; Development; Lung; Vasculature; Vasodilation

Funding

  1. Sophia Foundation for Medical Research [678]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Patients with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) have structural and functional different pulmonary vessels, leading to pulmonary hypertension. They often fail to respond to standard vasodilator therapy targeting the major vasoactive pathways, causing a high morbidity and mortality. We analyzed whether the expression of crucial members of these vasoactive pathways could explain the lack of responsiveness to therapy in CDH patients. Methods: The expression of direct targets of current vasodilator therapy in the endothelin and prostacyclin pathway was analyzed in human lung specimens of control and CDH patients. Results: CDH lungs showed increased expression of both ETA and ETB endothelin receptors and the rate-limiting Endothelin Converting Enzyme (ECE-1), and a decreased expression of the prostaglandin-I-2 receptor (PTGIR). These data were supported by increased expression of both endothelin receptors and ECE-1, endothelial nitric oxide synthase and PTGIR in the well-established nitrofen-CDH rodent model. Conclusions: Together, these data demonstrate aberrant expression of targeted receptors in the endothelin and prostacyclin pathway in CDH already early during development. The analysis of this unique patient material may explain why a significant number of patients do not respond to vasodilator therapy. This knowledge could have important implications for the choice of drugs and the design of future clinical trials internationally.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available