4.5 Article

Mitochondrial respiration and membrane potential after low-flow ischemia are not affected by ischemic preconditioning

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.yjmcc.2007.08.004

关键词

ischemic preconditioning; ischemia; mitochondria; respiration; membrane potential

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondrial function following prolonged ischemia and subsequent reperfusion is better preserved by ischemic preconditioning (IP). In the present study, we analyzed whether or not IP has an impact on mitochondrial function at the end of a sustained ischemic period. Gottinger minipigs were subjected to 90-min low-flow ischemia without (n=5) and with (n=5) a preconditioning cycle of 10-min ischemia and 15-min reperfusion. Mitochondria were isolated from the ischemic or preconditioned anterior wall (AW) and the control posterior wall (PW) at the end of ischemia. Basal mitochondrial respiration was not different between AW and PW. The ADP-stimulated (state 3) respiration in AW mitochondria compared to PW mitochondria was equally decreased in non-preconditioned and preconditioned pigs. The uncoupled respiration as well as the membrane potential (rhodamine 123 fluorescence) were not significantly different between groups. However, the recovery of the membrane potential (A rhodamine 123 fluorescence/s) after the addition of ADP was delayed in mitochondria obtained from AW compared to PW, both in non-preconditioned and in preconditioned pig hearts. Neither the amount of marker proteins for complexes of the electron transport chain nor the level of reactive oxygen species were affected by ischemia without or with IP. State 3 respiration and recovery of membrane potential were impaired in pig mitochondria after 90 min of low-flow ischemia. IP did not improve mitochondrial function during ischemia. Therefore, the preservation of mitochondrial function by IP may occur during reperfusion rather than during the sustained ischemic period. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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