4.7 Article

Differential expression of renal adenosine A1 receptors induced by acute renal failure

Journal

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 59, Issue 6, Pages 727-732

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-2952(99)00369-X

Keywords

kidney; adenosine A(1) receptor; [H-3]8-cyclopentyl-1,3-dipropylxanthine; autoradiography; acute renal failure; mercuric chloride

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The distribution of renal adenosine A, receptors was investigated in rats with glycerol- or mercuric chloride (HgCl2)-induced acute renal failure. Receptors were localised by autoradiography using [H-3]8-cyclopentyl-1,3-dipropylxanthine ([H-3]DPCPX), a selective A(1) adenosine receptor antagonist. In saline-injected control animals, significant labelling with [H-3]DPCPX was detected in glomeruli, the inner stripe of outer medulla, and the inner medulla. Sixteen hours following induction of glycerol-induced acute renal failure (ARF), a 34% increase in labelling in glomeruli was noted compared to saline-injected controls, and by 48 hr, glomerular labelling had increased by 200%. In addition, 48 hr following glycerol injection, significant labelling was now detected in the cortical labyrinth and medullary rays whilst, in the inner medulla, labelling had decreased by 34%. By contrast to glycerol-induced ARF, the only significant change noted 48 hr following induction of HgCl2-induced ARF was a 39% decrease in labelling in the inner medulla. It is concluded that glycerol-induced ARF results in differential expression of renal adenosine A(1) receptors with increased expression in the cortex and reduced expression in the inner medulla. Increased density of A(1) receptors in glomeruli may account, at least in part, for the increased renal vasoconstrictor response to adenosine and depressed glomerular filtration rate noted previously in this type of acute renal failure. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc.

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