4.7 Article

Repeated Remote Ischemic Postconditioning Protects Against Adverse Left Ventricular Remodeling and Improves Survival in a Rat Model of Myocardial Infarction

期刊

CIRCULATION RESEARCH
卷 108, 期 10, 页码 1220-U199

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.110.236190

关键词

heart failure; remote postconditioning; myocardial infarction; remodeling; reperfusion

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes for Health Research
  2. Leducq Foundation
  3. Shanghai Jiao Tong University Sixth Hospital
  4. Natural Science Foundation of China [81070110]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rationale: Remote ischemic conditioning induced by repeated episodes of transient limb ischemia is a clinically applicable method for protecting the heart against injury at the time of reperfusion. Objective: To assess the effect of chronic, repeated, remote conditioning on infarct size and long-term remodeling after myocardial infarction. Methods and Results: Rats with ischemia/reperfusion injury received different protocols of remote limb conditioning. While a single early episode of remote ischemic conditioning during coronary occlusion (perconditioning) resulted in a decrease in infarct size on both day 4 and day 28, when it was repeated (postconditioning) intermittently (every 3 days) and intensively (every day), it was not associated with a further decrease in infarct size. However, the protection against adverse remodeling offered by a single episode of limb perconditioning was further enhanced by repeated remote postconditioning therapy in a dose-dependent manner. In separate experiments there was a dose-dependent improvement in survival at 84 days by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Conclusions: Whereas a single early episode of remote perconditioning reduces infarct size, repeated remote postconditioning further reduces adverse LV remodeling and improves survival in a dose-dependent fashion. These data may have clinical implications for the treatment of patients with evolving myocardial infarction. (Circ Res. 2011;108:1220-1225.)

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