4.4 Article

Segmental heterogeneity in the mechanism of sodium nitroprusside-induced relaxation in ovine pulmonary artery

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY
卷 45, 期 6, 页码 491-498

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.fjc.0000159043.50488.ac

关键词

pulmonary artery; sodium nitroprusside; vasodilation; voltage-gated potassium channel; Na+; K+-ATPase; cGMP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Segmental heterogeneity in relaxation response to nitric oxide (NO) was examined using NO donor sodium nitroprusside (SNP) in second- (medium) and fourth-generation (small) ovine isolated intralobar pulmonary arteries. In vessels precontracted with serotonin, NO donors SNP and S-nitroso-N-acetylpenicillamine (SNAP) were more potent in relaxing medium, in comparison to the small, arteries. Soluble guanylyl cyclase (sGC) inhibitor [1,2,4]oxadiazolo[4,3-a]quinoxaline-1-one (ODQ 3 mu M) caused a profound inhibition of SNP relaxation in small as compared with medium-sized arteries. However, both basal and SNP (10 mu M)-stimulated intracellular cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) content was identical in these 2 arterial segments. The Na+,K+-ATPase inhibitor ouabain (1 mu M) had a marked inhibitory effect on SNP-mediated relaxation in both segments. There was no segmental difference in SNP (10 mu M)stimulated plasma membrane Na+,K-ATPase activity and ouabain-sensitive Rb-86-uptake. 4-AP (1 mM), a relatively selective inhibitor of K-v channels, decreased the potency of SNP relaxation by about 10-fold in the medium-sized vessels. On the other hand, 4-AP was without effect on the vasodilator potency of SNP in small vessels. Interestingly, in the presence of 4-AP, SNP was equipotent in dilating both medium (pD(2) = 5.80 +/- 0.07; E-max = 84 +/- 1.6%, n = 7) and small (pD(2) = 5.74 +/- 0.15; E-max = 83 +/- 2.5%, n = 7) pulmonary arteries. In conclusion, the results of the present study suggest that Kv channels determine the segmental heterogeneity of NO-mediated relaxation in ovine pulmonary artery.

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

4.4
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