Cargando…

Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone

Remote ischemic perconditioning (RIPerC) and remote ischemic postconditioning (RIPostC) have been previously demonstrated to protect the myocardium against ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury. However, their combined effects remain to be fully elucidated. In order to investigate this, the present study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: CHEN, KANKAI, YAN, MEILING, WU, PENGLONG, QING, YANWEI, LI, SHUAI, LI, YONGGUANG, DONG, ZHIFENG, XIA, HONGJUAN, HUANG, DONG, XIN, PING, LI, JINGBO, WEI, MENG
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26572069
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2015.4533
_version_ 1782406393300516864
author CHEN, KANKAI
YAN, MEILING
WU, PENGLONG
QING, YANWEI
LI, SHUAI
LI, YONGGUANG
DONG, ZHIFENG
XIA, HONGJUAN
HUANG, DONG
XIN, PING
LI, JINGBO
WEI, MENG
author_facet CHEN, KANKAI
YAN, MEILING
WU, PENGLONG
QING, YANWEI
LI, SHUAI
LI, YONGGUANG
DONG, ZHIFENG
XIA, HONGJUAN
HUANG, DONG
XIN, PING
LI, JINGBO
WEI, MENG
author_sort CHEN, KANKAI
collection PubMed
description Remote ischemic perconditioning (RIPerC) and remote ischemic postconditioning (RIPostC) have been previously demonstrated to protect the myocardium against ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury. However, their combined effects remain to be fully elucidated. In order to investigate this, the present study used an in vivo rat model to assess whether synergistic effects are produced when RIPerC is combined with RIPostC. The rats were randomly assigned to the following groups: Sham, IR, RIPerC, RIPostC and RIPerC + RIPostC groups. The IR model was established by performing 40 min of left coronary artery occlusion, followed by 2 h of reperfusion. RIPerC and RIPostC were induced via four cycles of 5 min occlusion and 5 min reperfusion of the hindlimbs, either during or subsequent to myocardial ischemia. On measurement of infarct sizes, compared with the IR group (49.45±6.59%), the infarct sizes were significantly reduced in the RIPerC (34.36±5.87%) and RIPostC (36.04±6.16%) groups (P<0.05). However, no further reduction in infarct size was observed in the RIPerC + RIPostC group (31.43±5.43%; P>0.05), compared with the groups treated with either RIPerC or RIPostC alone. Activation of the reperfusion injury salvage kinase (RISK) Akt, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 and glycogen synthase kinase-3β, and survivor activating factor enhancement (SAFE) signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 pathways were enhanced in the RIPerC, RIPostC and the RIPerC + RIPostC groups, compared with the IR group, with no difference among the three groups. Therefore, whereas RIPerC and RIPostC were equally effective in providing protection against myocardial IR injury, the combination of RIPerC and RIPostC failed to provide further protection than treatment with either alone. The cardioprotective effects were found to be associated with increased activation of the RISK and SAFE pathways.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4686025
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46860252015-12-31 Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone CHEN, KANKAI YAN, MEILING WU, PENGLONG QING, YANWEI LI, SHUAI LI, YONGGUANG DONG, ZHIFENG XIA, HONGJUAN HUANG, DONG XIN, PING LI, JINGBO WEI, MENG Mol Med Rep Articles Remote ischemic perconditioning (RIPerC) and remote ischemic postconditioning (RIPostC) have been previously demonstrated to protect the myocardium against ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury. However, their combined effects remain to be fully elucidated. In order to investigate this, the present study used an in vivo rat model to assess whether synergistic effects are produced when RIPerC is combined with RIPostC. The rats were randomly assigned to the following groups: Sham, IR, RIPerC, RIPostC and RIPerC + RIPostC groups. The IR model was established by performing 40 min of left coronary artery occlusion, followed by 2 h of reperfusion. RIPerC and RIPostC were induced via four cycles of 5 min occlusion and 5 min reperfusion of the hindlimbs, either during or subsequent to myocardial ischemia. On measurement of infarct sizes, compared with the IR group (49.45±6.59%), the infarct sizes were significantly reduced in the RIPerC (34.36±5.87%) and RIPostC (36.04±6.16%) groups (P<0.05). However, no further reduction in infarct size was observed in the RIPerC + RIPostC group (31.43±5.43%; P>0.05), compared with the groups treated with either RIPerC or RIPostC alone. Activation of the reperfusion injury salvage kinase (RISK) Akt, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 and glycogen synthase kinase-3β, and survivor activating factor enhancement (SAFE) signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 pathways were enhanced in the RIPerC, RIPostC and the RIPerC + RIPostC groups, compared with the IR group, with no difference among the three groups. Therefore, whereas RIPerC and RIPostC were equally effective in providing protection against myocardial IR injury, the combination of RIPerC and RIPostC failed to provide further protection than treatment with either alone. The cardioprotective effects were found to be associated with increased activation of the RISK and SAFE pathways. D.A. Spandidos 2016-01 2015-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4686025/ /pubmed/26572069 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2015.4533 Text en Copyright: © Chen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
CHEN, KANKAI
YAN, MEILING
WU, PENGLONG
QING, YANWEI
LI, SHUAI
LI, YONGGUANG
DONG, ZHIFENG
XIA, HONGJUAN
HUANG, DONG
XIN, PING
LI, JINGBO
WEI, MENG
Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title_full Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title_fullStr Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title_full_unstemmed Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title_short Combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
title_sort combination of remote ischemic perconditioning and remote ischemic postconditioning fails to increase protection against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury, compared with either alone
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4686025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26572069
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2015.4533
work_keys_str_mv AT chenkankai combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT yanmeiling combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT wupenglong combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT qingyanwei combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT lishuai combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT liyongguang combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT dongzhifeng combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT xiahongjuan combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT huangdong combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT xinping combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT lijingbo combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone
AT weimeng combinationofremoteischemicperconditioningandremoteischemicpostconditioningfailstoincreaseprotectionagainstmyocardialischemiareperfusioninjurycomparedwitheitheralone