4.6 Article

Mitochondrial reactive oxygen species production and respiratory complex activity in rats with pressure overload-induced heart failure

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 592, 期 17, 页码 3767-3782

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2014.274704

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [DO 602/4-1, 6-1, 8-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the impact of cardiac reactive oxygen species (ROS) during the development of pressure overload-induced heart failure. We used our previously described rat model where transverse aortic constriction (TAC) induces compensated hypertrophy after 2weeks, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction at 6 and 10 weeks, and heart failure with systolic dysfunction after 20weeks. We measured mitochondrial ROS production rates, ROS damage and assessed the therapeutic potential of in vivo antioxidant therapies. In compensated hypertrophy (2weeks of TAC) ROS production rates were normal at both mitochondrial ROS production sites (complexes I and III). Complex I ROS production rates increased with the appearance of diastolic dysfunction (6weeks of TAC) and remained high thereafter. Surprisingly, maximal ROS production at complexIII peaked at 6weeks of pressure overload. Mitochondrial respiratory capacity (state 3 respiration) was elevated 2 and 6 weeks after TAC, decreased after this point and was significantly impaired at 20weeks, when contractile function was also impaired and ROS damage was found with increased hydroxynonenal. Treatment with the ROS scavenger -phenyl-N-tert-butyl nitrone or the uncoupling agent dinitrophenol significantly reduced ROS production rates at 6weeks. Despite the decline in ROS production capacity, no differences in contractile function between treated and untreated animals were observed. Increased ROS production occurs early in the development of heart failure with a peak at the onset of diastolic dysfunction. However, ROS production may not be related to the onset of contractile dysfunction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据