4.2 Article

A comparative study of PGI2 mimetics used clinically on the vasorelaxation of human pulmonary arteries and veins, role of the DP-receptor

期刊

PROSTAGLANDINS & OTHER LIPID MEDIATORS
卷 107, 期 -, 页码 48-55

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.prostaglandins.2013.07.001

关键词

Prostanoid receptors; Prostacyclin mimetic; Vasorelaxation; Human pulmonary artery; Human pulmonary vein; Pulmonary hypertension

资金

  1. United Therapeutics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prostacyclin (PGI(2)) and its mimetics (iloprost, treprostinil, beraprost and MRE-269) are potent vasodilators (via IP-receptor activation) and a major therapeutic intervention for pulmonary hypertension (PH). These PGI(2) mimetics have anti-proliferative and,potent vasodilator effects on pulmonary vessels. We compared the relaxant effects induced by these recognized IP-agonists in isolated human pulmonary arteries (HPA) and veins (HPV). In addition, using selective antagonists, the possible activation of other prostanoid relaxant receptors (DP, EP4) was investigated. Iloprost and treprostinil were the more potent relaxant agonists when both vessels were analyzed. HPA were significantly more sensitive to iloprost than to treprostinil, pEC(50) values: 7.94 +/- 0.06 (n=23) and 6.73 +/- 0.08 (n=33), respectively. In contrast, in HPV these agonists were equipotent. The relaxations induced by treprostinil were completely or partially inhibited by IP-antagonists in HPA or HPV, respectively. The effects of the IP-agonists were not significantly modified by the EP4 antagonist. Finally, DP-antagonists inhibited the relaxations induced by treprostinil in HPV, suggesting that the DP-receptor plays a role in treprostinil-induced relaxation in the HPV. These data suggest that iloprost and treprostinil should be the most effective clinically available agonists to decrease pulmonary vascular resistance and to prevent oedema formation (by similar decrease in HPA and HPV resistance) in PH patients. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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