4.0 Article

Correction of endothelial dysfunction in diabetic female rats by tetrahydrobiopterin and chronic insulin

Journal

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR RESEARCH
Volume 43, Issue 4, Pages 309-320

Publisher

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000093196

Keywords

diabetes; endothelial dysfunction; insulin; microcirculation; nitric oxide; oxidative stress; tetrahydrobiopterin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Diabetes-induced vascular dysfunction has mainly been studied in males. However, the mechanisms involved may not correspond to those in females. Here we analyzed the effects of tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) and chronic insu in on the physiology of mesenteric arterioles of alloxar-diabetic female rats. The parameters studied were the mesenteric arteriolar reactivity (intravital microscopy), nitric oxide synthase (NOS) activity (conversion of L-arginine to L-citrulline), eNOS gene expression (RT-PCR), NO production (diaminofluorescein), reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation (intravital fluorescence microscopy) and Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity (spectrophotometry) and gene expression (RTPCR). The reduced endothelium-dependent vasodilation of diabetic females was corrected by both BH4 and insulin. NOS activity was decreased by diabetes, but insulin did not correct it. However, NOS expression was not modified by either diabetes or insulin. Arterioles of diabetic rats exhibited lower NO production, which was fully corrected by BH4 and only partially by insulin. ROS generation was increased in diabetic rats, and both BH4 and insulin normalized it. Diabetes did not change SOD activity and gene expression. However, insulin increased SOD activity but not its expression. Our data suggest that, similarly to males, endothelial dysfunction in female diabetic rats involves an altered ROS/NO imbalance. In contrast to males, however, insulin does not regulate NOS in the microcirculation of diabetic females. Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available