4.7 Article

Impact of beta-myosin heavy chain expression on cardiac function during stress

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 44, 期 12, 页码 2390-2397

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.09.044

关键词

-

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL 69799, HL 60546, HL 66157, HL 56370] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES In failing mouse and human hearts, a shift in myosin heavy chain (MHC) isoform content from alpha to beta can occur. However, the impact of this phenomenon on disease progression is not well understood. Therefore, using transgenic (TG) mice, we tested how a pre-existing shift from alpha- to beta-MHC affects cardiac function under chronic mechanical or pharmacologic cardiovascular stress. BACKGROUND Expression of beta-MHC is considered to be energetically favorable, but this might be offset by depressed cardiac function. METHODS Transgenic mice with near-complete replacement of the normally predominant alpha- with beta-MHC were subjected to cardiac stress. RESULTS At baseline, TG mice show moderately reduced cardiac contractile function but are otherwise healthy with normal ventricular morphology. After four weeks of swimming, both TG and non-TG animals showed a 20% increase in left ventricular (LV)/body weight ratios. The TG hearts displayed mildly greater end-diastolic and end-systolic LV diameters than nontransgenic hearts after training, but no signs of LV failure were observed. However, chronic stimulation with isoproterenol resulted in augmented LV hypertrophy with signs of LV decompensation in TG mice. Furthermore, in a post-infarction failure model, TG hearts displayed accelerated LV dilation and a faster decline of shortening fraction. CONCLUSIONS Expression of beta-MHC appears to be disadvantageous to the mice under severe cardiovascular stress, implying that the alpha-->beta-MHC isoform shift observed in cardiac disease may be a maladaptive response. (C) 2004 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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