4.6 Article

A novel set-up for the ex vivo analysis of mechanical properties of mouse aortic segments stretched at physiological pressure and frequency

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 594, 期 21, 页码 6105-6115

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1113/JP272623

关键词

arterial stiffness; basal nitric oxide; cyclic stretch; VSMC tone

资金

  1. Fund for Scientific Research (FWO) Flanders [11W3716N]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cyclic stretch is a major contributor to vascular function. However, isolated mouse aortas are frequently studied at low stretch frequency or even in isometric conditions. Pacing experiments in rodents and humans show that arterial compliance is stretch frequency dependent. The Rodent Oscillatory Tension Set-up to study Arterial Compliance is an in-house developed organ bath set-up that clamps aortic segments to imposed preloads at physiological rates up to 600beatsmin(-1). The technique enables us to derive pressure-diameter loops and assess biomechanical properties of the segment. To validate the applicability of this set-up we aimed to confirm the effects of distension pressure and vascular smooth muscle tone on arterial stiffness. At physiological stretch frequency (10Hz), the Peterson modulus (E-P; 293 (10) mmHg) for wild-type mouse aorta increased 22% upon a rise in pressure from 80-120mmHg to 100-140mmHg, while, at normal pressure, E-P increased 80% upon maximal contraction of the vascular smooth muscle cells. We further validated the method using a mouse model with a mutation in the fibrillin-1 gene and an endothelial nitric oxide synthase knock-out model. Both models are known to have increased arterial stiffness, and this was confirmed using the set-up. To our knowledge, this is the first set-up that facilitates the study of biomechanical properties of mouse aortic segments at physiological stretch frequency and pressure. We believe that this set-up can contribute to a better understanding of how cyclic stretch frequency, amplitude and active vessel wall components influence arterial stiffening.

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

4.6
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