4.7 Article

Gender differences in experimental aortic aneurysm formation

Journal

ARTERIOSCLEROSIS THROMBOSIS AND VASCULAR BIOLOGY
Volume 24, Issue 11, Pages 2116-2122

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000143386.26399.84

Keywords

aorta; aneurysm; genetic; estrogen; metalloproteinase

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [T32-HL07853-05, K08 HL67885-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective - It is hypothesized that a male predominance, similar to that in humans, persists in a rodent model of experimental abdominal aortic aneurysm ( AAA) via alterations in matrix metalloproteinases ( MMPs). Methods and Results - Group I experiments were as follows: elastase perfusion of the infrarenal aorta was performed in male ( M) and female ( F) rats. At 14 days, aortas were harvested for immunohistochemistry, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and zymography. Group II experiments were the following: abdominal aorta was transplanted from F or M donors into F or M recipients. At 14 days, rodents that had undergone transplantation underwent elastase perfusion. In group III, male rats were given estradiol or sham 5 days before elastase perfusion. In group I, M rats had larger AAAs with higher frequency than did F rats. M rat aortas had more significant macrophage infiltrates and increased matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9 production and activity. In group II, M-to-M aortic transplants uniformly developed aneurysms after elastase perfusion, whereas F-to-F aortic transplants remained resistant to aneurysm formation. F aortas transplanted into M recipients, however, lost aneurysm resistance. In group III, estradiol-treated rats demonstrated smaller aneurysms and less macrophage infiltrate and MMP-9 compared with M controls after elastase. Conclusions - These data provide evidence of gender-related differences in AAA development, which may reflect an estrogen-mediated reduction in macrophage MMP-9 production.

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