4.7 Review

ROS and redox signaling in myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury and cardioprotection

期刊

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
卷 117, 期 -, 页码 76-89

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2018.01.024

关键词

Mitochondria; Ischemia-reperfusion; Preconditioning; Reactive oxygen species; Redox signaling; Oxidative damage

资金

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [FIS PI15/00448]
  2. Fundacion Ramon Areces
  3. Banco de Santander

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury is central to the pathology of major cardiovascular diseases, such as stroke and myocardial infarction. IR injury is mediated by several factors including the elevated production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which occurs particularly at reperfusion. The mitochondrial respiratory chain and NADPH oxidases of the NOX family are major sources of ROS in cardiomyocytes. The first part of this review discusses recent findings and controversies on the mechanisms of superoxide production by the mitochondrial electron transport chain during IR injury, as well as the contribution of the NOX isoforms expressed in cardiomyocytes, NOX1, NOX2 and NOX4, to this damage. It then focuses on the effects of ROS on the opening of the mitochondrial permeability transition pore (mPTP), an inner membrane non-selective pore that causes irreversible damage to the heart. The second part analyzes the redox mechanisms of cardiomyocyte mitochondrial protection; specifically, the activation of the hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) pathway and the antioxidant transcription factor Nrf2, which are both regulated by the cellular redox state. Redox mechanisms involved in ischemic preconditioning, one of the most effective ways of protecting the heart against IR injury, are also reviewed. Interestingly, several of these protective pathways converge on the inhibition of mPTP opening during reperfusion. Finally, the clinical and translational implications of these cardioprotective mechanisms are discussed.

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