4.8 Article

Myocardial infarct expansion and matrix metalloproteinase inhibition

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 107, 期 4, 页码 618-625

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000046449.36178.00

关键词

myocardial infarction; metalloproteinases; inhibitors

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL-97012, HL-45024] Funding Source: Medline
  2. PHS HHS [P01-48788] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-A potential mechanism for left ventricular (LV) remodeling after myocardial infarction (MI) is activation of the matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). This study examined the effects of MMP inhibition (MMPi) on regional LV geometry and MMP levels after MI. Methods and Results-In pigs instrumented with radiopaque markers to measure regional myocardial geometry, MI was created by ligating the obtuse marginals of the circumflex artery. In the first study, pigs were randomized to MMIi (n=7; PD166793, 20 mg . kg(-1) . d(-1) or MI only (n=7) at 5 days after MI, and measurements were performed at 2 weeks. Regional MI areas were equivalent at randomization and were increased in the MI-only group at 2 weeks after MI compared with the MMPi group. In the second study, pigs randomized to MMPi (n=9) or MI only (n=8) were serially followed up for 8 weeks. At 8 weeks after MI, LV end-diastolic dimension was lower with MMPi than in the MI-only group (4.7 +/- 0.1 versus 5.1 +/- 0.1 cm, P<0.05). Regional MI area was reduced with MMPi at 8 weeks after MI (1.3 +/- 0.1 versus 1.7 +/- 0.1 cm(2), P<0.05). MMPi reduced ex vivo MMP proteolytic activity. In the MI region, membrane-type MMP levels were normalized and levels of the endogenous tissue inhibitor of MMPs (TIMP-1) were increased compared with normal levels with MMPi. These effects were not observed in the MI-only group. Conclusions-MMPi attenuated the degree of post-MILV dilation and expansion of the infarct during the late phase of MI healing. In addition, exogenous MMPi caused region-specific modulation of certain MMP and TIMP species.

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

4.8
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