4.7 Article

Haemodynamic effects of the flavonoid quercetin in rats revisited

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY
卷 177, 期 8, 页码 1841-1852

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bph.14955

关键词

-

资金

  1. Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority [V/090143/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose The flavonoid quercetin increased the in vitro potency of the alpha(1)-antagonist tamsulosin to reduce phenylephrine-dependent arterial contractions by 10-fold. To examine if this supplement-drug interaction luxates hypotensive and orthostatic events in vivo, several set of studies were conducted in spontaneously hypertensive (SHR) and normotensive (Wistar Kyoto [WKY]) rats. Experimental Approach First, in rats pretreated with quercetin or its vehicle, responses to phenylephrine and tamsulosin were examined. Second, tamsulosin-induced changes in renal, mesenteric, hindquarter and carotid conductance were compared in quercetin- and vehicle-treated rats instrumented with Doppler flow probes. Animals were also placed on a tilt table to record regional haemodynamic changes to orthostatic challenges. Third, adult SHR were instrumented with telemeters to measure 24-hr patterns of BP. Recordings were made before and during a 5-week oral treatment of quercetin. Finally, pre-hypertensive SHR were treated with quercetin from 4 to 8 weeks of age and arterial pressure was measured at 8 and 12 weeks. Key Results Pretreatment with quercetin did not influence the responses to phenylephrine and tamsulosin, in neither WKY nor SHR. While tamsulosin treatment and tilting lowered BP and increased conductance in all vascular beds, effect size was not influenced by pretreatment with quercetin. Prolonged treatment with quercetin, in either prehypertensive SHR or adult SHR with established hypertension did not lower BP. Conclusions and Implications Cumulatively, these data demonstrate that quercetin does not amplify haemodynamic effects of tamsulosin or tilting in vivo in rats and has no effect on BP development in SHR.

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