4.7 Article

Ability of CP-532,903 to protect mouse hearts from ischemia/reperfusion injury is dependent on expression of A3 adenosine receptors in cardiomyoyctes

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 163, 期 -, 页码 21-31

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2019.01.022

关键词

Adenosine; Adenosine receptors; Ischemia/reperfusion; ATP-sensitive potassium channels

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, United States [R01 HL077707, R01 HL133589, R01 HL111392]
  2. Cardiovascular Center at the Medical College of Wisconsin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A(3) adenosine receptor (A(3)AR) agonists are effective at limiting injury caused by ischemia/reperfusion injury of the heart in experimental animal models. However, understanding of their mechanism of action, which is likely multifactorial, remains incomplete. In prior studies, it has been demonstrated that A(3)AR-mediated ischemic protection is blocked by glibenclamide and is absent in Kir6.2 gene ablated mice that lack the pore-forming subunit of the ATP-sensitive potassium (K-ATP) channel, suggesting one contributing mechanism may involve accelerated activation of K-ATP channels. However, presence of A(3)ARs in the myocardium has yet to be established. Utilizing a whole-cell recording technique, in this study we confirm functional expression of the A(3)AR in adult mouse ventricular cardiomyocytes, coupled to activation of ATP-dependent potassium (K-ATP) channels via G(i) inhibitory proteins. We further show that ischemic protection provided by the selective A(3)AR agonist CP-532,903 in an isolated, buffer-perfused heart model is lost completely in Adora3(LoxP/LoxP;Myh6-Cre) mice, which is a newly developed model developed and comprehensively described herein whereby the A(3)AR gene (Adora3) is deleted exclusively in cardiomyocytes. Our findings, taken together with previously published work, are consistent with the hypothesis that A(3)AR agonists provide ischemic tolerance, at least in part, by facilitating opening of myocardial K-ATP channels.

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

4.7
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