4.0 Article

Dietary supplementation with either saturated or unsaturated fatty acids does not affect the mechanoenergetics of the isolated rat heart

期刊

PHYSIOLOGICAL REPORTS
卷 2, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/phy2.272

关键词

Cardiac efficiency; fish oils; working-heart preparation

资金

  1. National Heart Foundation of New Zealand [1428, 1529, 1524]
  2. Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust (University of Auckland) [3701355]
  3. University of Auckland Faculty Research Development Fund [3627115, 3627220]
  4. University of Auckland Doctoral Scholarship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It is generally recognized that increased consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids, fish oil (FO) in particular, is beneficial to cardiac and cardiovascular health, whereas equivalent consumption of saturated fats is deleterious. In this study, we explore this divergence, adopting a limited purview: The effect of dietary fatty acids on the mechanoenergetics of the isolated heart per se. Mechanical indices of interest include left-ventricular (LV) developed pressure, stroke work, cardiac output, coronary perfusion, and LV power. The principal energetic index is whole-heart oxygen consumption, which we subdivide into its active and basal moieties. The primary mechanoenergetic index of interest is cardiac efficiency, the ratio of work performance to metabolic energy expenditure. Wistar rats were divided into three Diet groups and fed, ad libitum, reference (REF), fish oil-supplemented (FO), or saturated fatty acid-supplemented (SFA) food for 6 weeks. At the end of the dietary period, hearts were excised, mounted in a working-heart rig, and their mechanoenergetic performance quantified over a range of preloads and afterloads. Analyses of Variance revealed no difference in any of the individual mechanoenergetic indices among the three Diet groups. In particular, we found no effect of prior dietary supplementation with either saturated or unsaturated fatty acids on the global efficiency of the heart.

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

4.0
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