4.5 Article

Impaired endothelium-dependent and -independent vasodilation in elderly patients with chronic heart failure

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
Volume 6, Issue 7, Pages 901-908

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejheart.2004.02.008

Keywords

heart failure; endothelium; nitric oxide; acetylcholine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Impaired endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilator responses in chronic heart failure (CHF) have been well described. Previous studies involved younger patients and omitted medications prior to study. Aims: We explored if new therapeutic interventions would restore vasodilator responses in typical patients with chronic heart failure. Methods and results: 24 patients and 15 controls were recruited, patients were maintained on their usual medications. Forearm blood flow responses were measured by venous occlusion plethysmography in response to incremental doses of sodium nitroprusside (SNP) (6, 9 and 12 nmol/min), acetylcholine (ACH) (120, 180 and 240 nmol/min), angiotensin II (All) (1, 10 and 100 nmol/min) and N-g-Nitro-L-arginine methyl ester (L-NAME) (1, 2 and 4 nmol/min) infused into the non-dominant brachial artery. FBF responses to SNP were impaired in patients compared with controls (13.7(9.9,17.4) vs. 24.8(18.6,30.9)) arbitrary units, P<0.001). Similarly FBF responses to ACH were reduced in patients compared with controls (7.5(4.2,10.9) vs. 24.8(16.4,33.2)) arbitrary units, P<0.001. Decreased FBF was noted in response to All and L-NAME but was significant only for All and did not differ between groups. Conclusions: In elderly patients with CHF, endothelium-dependent and independent vasodilator responses were blunted compared with controls. Defects in nitric oxide bioavailability and smooth muscle responsiveness are not reversed by modem medical management of the heart failure syndrome. (C) 2004 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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