4.4 Article

Creatine deficiency and heart failure

期刊

HEART FAILURE REVIEWS
卷 27, 期 5, 页码 1605-1616

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10741-021-10173-y

关键词

Creatine; Creatine deficiency; Cardiac energy metabolism; Heart failure

资金

  1. Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna within the CRUI-CARE Agreement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Impaired cardiac energy metabolism is proposed as a common mechanism in various heart failure causes, with researchers focusing on the energy-depletion hypothesis. The creatine kinase system plays a vital role in the heart, with creatine levels reflecting disease severity, contractile dysfunction, and myocardial remodelling in heart failure.
Impaired cardiac energy metabolism has been proposed as a mechanism common to different heart failure aetiologies. The energy-depletion hypothesis was pursued by several researchers, and is still a topic of considerable interest. Unlike most organs, in the heart, the creatine kinase system represents a major component of the metabolic machinery, as it functions as an energy shuttle between mitochondria and cytosol. In heart failure, the decrease in creatine level anticipates the reduction in adenosine triphosphate, and the degree of myocardial phosphocreatine/adenosine triphosphate ratio reduction correlates with disease severity, contractile dysfunction, and myocardial structural remodelling. However, it remains to be elucidated whether an impairment of phosphocreatine buffer activity contributes to the pathophysiology of heart failure and whether correcting this energy deficit might prove beneficial. The effects of creatine deficiency and the potential utility of creatine supplementation have been investigated in experimental and clinical models, showing controversial findings. The goal of this article is to provide a comprehensive overview on the role of creatine in cardiac energy metabolism, the assessment and clinical value of creatine deficiency in heart failure, and the possible options for the specific metabolic therapy.

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

4.4
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