4.7 Article

Endothelial Cell Sensing of Flow Direction

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.113.301826

关键词

atherosclerosis; hemodynamics; mechanotransduction, cellular

资金

  1. American Heart Association [10POST4140009]
  2. National Institutes of Health
  3. US Public Health Service (USPHS) [R01 EB00262, RO1 HL75092]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective-Atherosclerosis-prone regions of arteries are characterized by complex flow patterns where the magnitude of shear stress is low and direction rapidly changes, termed disturbed flow. How endothelial cells sense flow direction and how it impacts inflammatory effects of disturbed flow are unknown. We therefore aimed to understand how endothelial cells respond to changes in flow direction. Approach and Results-Using a recently developed flow system capable of changing flow direction to any angle, we show that responses of aligned endothelial cells are determined by flow direction relative to their morphological and cytoskeletal axis. Activation of the atheroprotective endothelial nitric oxide synthase pathway is maximal at 180 degrees and undetectable at 90 degrees, whereas activation of proinflammatory nuclear factor-kappa B is maximal at 90 degrees and undetectable at 180 degrees. Similar effects were observed in randomly oriented cells in naive monolayers subjected to onset of shear. Cells aligned on micropatterned substrates subjected to oscillatory flow were also examined. In this system, parallel flow preferentially activated endothelial nitric oxide synthase and production of nitric oxide, whereas perpendicular flow preferentially activated reactive oxygen production and nuclear factor-kappa B. Conclusions-These data show that the angle between flow and the cell axis defined by their shape and cytoskeleton determines endothelial cell responses. The data also strongly suggest that the inability of cells to align in low and oscillatory flow is a key determinant of the resultant inflammatory activation.

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