4.6 Article

Na+/H+ exchange inhibition with cariporide prevents alterations of coronary endothelial function in streptozotocin-induced diabetes

期刊

MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 310, 期 1-2, 页码 93-102

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11010-007-9669-1

关键词

NHE-1 inhibition; coronary reactivity; streptozotocin-induced diabetes; redox potential

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hyperglycemia encountered during diabetes triggers abnormalities of vascular function associated with cell acidosis and calcium overload. The purpose of this study was to determine, whether Na+/H+ exchanger (NHE-1) inhibition by cariporide protects coronary cells against the deleterious effect of hyperglycemia in the rat. In vivo hyperglycemia was triggered by streptozotocin injection. One week after, the glycemia was checked and the control and diabetic animals were treated or not with cariporide (2.5 mg/kg/day) for two weeks. Glycemia was again estimated and the hearts were perfused according to the Langendorff mode at forced flow. The left ventricle developed pressure (LVDP) and heart rate (HR) were determined with a latex balloon inserted into the left ventricle. Coronary pressure was artificially increased to 130 mmHg by infusing a thromboxane A(2) analogue (U46619). This allowed the evaluation of endothelium-dependent (EDD) and endothelium-independent (EID) dilatation through bolus injections of carbamoylcholin and sodium nitroprusside, respectively. Releases of lactate and pyruvate in the coronary effluents were also determined. Diabetes did not modified LVDP, but reduced HR (-15%). This was associated with a marked decrease in EDD (-56%) and EID (-30%), while the cytosolic redox potential (estimated as the lactate/pyruvate ratio) was reduced. NHE-1 inhibition restored EDD and the lactate/pyruvate ratio without improving EID and HR. The present findings indicate that NHE-1 exchanger inhibition by cariporide protects the coronary endothelium against the deleterious effects of hyperglycemia.

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