4.7 Article

Genetic depletion of cardiac myocyte STAT-3 abolishes classical preconditioning

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 63, 期 4, 页码 611-616

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2004.06.019

关键词

ischemia; preconditioning; signal transduction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To evaluate the functional requirement of signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 (STAT-3) in cardiac myocyte tolerance to ischemia (1) and in classical preconditioning. Methods: Cardiac myocyte STAT-3 was depleted in mice using Cre-lox p technology. Isolated cardiomyocytes from wild-type (WT) and STAT-3-deficient mice were evaluated for viability following simulated ischemia (SI; 26 h). Cardiomyocytes were then preconditioned by exposure to transient simulated ischemia or via the administration of preconditioning mimetics (100 muM adenosine, 100 muM diazoxide and 0.5 ng ml(-1) TNFalpha, individually and in combination) prior to index ischemia. To evaluate the effect of cardiac myocyte depletion of STAT-3 in the context of the intact heart, these experiments were performed in isolated perfused Langendorff heart preparations which were exposed to an index insult of 30-min global ischemia and 45-min reperfusion. Ischemic preconditioning was achieved by subjecting the hearts to four cycles of 5-min ischemia followed by 5-min reperfusion prior to index ischemia. Infarct size was measured following reperfusion. Results: Cell viability was diminished equally in wild-type and STAT-3-depleted cardiomyocytes. In contrast, ischemic and pharmacological preconditioning protected wild-type cardiomyocytes but not STAT-3-deficient cardiomyocytes. These results were mirrored in the intact heart. Conclusion: The depletion of functional STAT-3 does not modulate tolerance to ischemic injury in cardiomyocytes. This signaling molecule, however, is crucial for the ischemic and all the tested pharmacological preconditioning programs. (C) 2004 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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