4.7 Article

Altered Mitochondrial Opa1-Related Fusion in Mouse Promotes Endothelial Cell Dysfunction and Atherosclerosis

期刊

ANTIOXIDANTS
卷 11, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antiox11061078

关键词

mitochondrial fusion; blood flow; shear stress; arteries; endothelial cell; atherosclerosis

资金

  1. foundation for Medical research (Fondation pour la Recherche Medicale) [FRM-DPC20171138957]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The reduction in mitochondrial fusion in mouse endothelial cells was found to impair the dilator response to shear stress, leading to excessive superoxide production and promoting greater atherosclerosis development.
Flow (shear stress)-mediated dilation (FMD) of resistance arteries is a rapid endothelial response involved in tissue perfusion. FMD is reduced early in cardiovascular diseases, generating a major risk factor for atherosclerosis. As alteration of mitochondrial fusion reduces endothelial cells' (ECs) sprouting and angiogenesis, we investigated its role in ECs responses to flow. Opa1 silencing reduced ECs (HUVECs) migration and flow-mediated elongation. In isolated perfused resistance arteries, FMD was reduced in Opa1(+/-) mice, a model of the human disease due to Opa1 haplo-insufficiency, and in mice with an EC specific Opa1 knock-out (EC-Opa1). Reducing mitochondrial oxidative stress restored FMD in EC-Opa1 mice. In isolated perfused kidneys from EC-Opa1 mice, flow induced a greater pressure, less ATP, and more H2O2 production, compared to control mice. Opa1 expression and mitochondrial length were reduced in ECs submitted in vitro to disturbed flow and in vivo in the atheroprone zone of the mouse aortic cross. Aortic lipid deposition was greater in Ldlr(-/-)-Opa1(+/-) and in Ldlr(-/-)-EC-Opa1 mice than in control mice fed with a high-fat diet. In conclusion, we found that reduction in mitochondrial fusion in mouse ECs altered the dilator response to shear stress due to excessive superoxide production and induced greater atherosclerosis development.

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