Cargando…

Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats

INTRODUCTION: Aerobic capacity is a strong predictor of cardiovascular mortality. Whether aerobic capacity influences myocardial ischemia and reperfusion (IR) injury is unknown. PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of intrinsic differences in aerobic capacity and the cardioprotective potential on IR i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft, Grønnebæk, Thomas Skjærlund, Jespersen, Nichlas Riise, Lassen, Thomas Ravn, Seefeldt, Jacob Marthinsen, Tonnesen, Pernille Tilma, Jensen, Rebekka Vibjerg, Koch, Lauren Gerard, Britton, Steven L., Pedersen, Michael, Jessen, Niels, Bøtker, Hans Erik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7591019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108389
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240866
_version_ 1783600909198032896
author Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft
Grønnebæk, Thomas Skjærlund
Jespersen, Nichlas Riise
Lassen, Thomas Ravn
Seefeldt, Jacob Marthinsen
Tonnesen, Pernille Tilma
Jensen, Rebekka Vibjerg
Koch, Lauren Gerard
Britton, Steven L.
Pedersen, Michael
Jessen, Niels
Bøtker, Hans Erik
author_facet Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft
Grønnebæk, Thomas Skjærlund
Jespersen, Nichlas Riise
Lassen, Thomas Ravn
Seefeldt, Jacob Marthinsen
Tonnesen, Pernille Tilma
Jensen, Rebekka Vibjerg
Koch, Lauren Gerard
Britton, Steven L.
Pedersen, Michael
Jessen, Niels
Bøtker, Hans Erik
author_sort Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Aerobic capacity is a strong predictor of cardiovascular mortality. Whether aerobic capacity influences myocardial ischemia and reperfusion (IR) injury is unknown. PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of intrinsic differences in aerobic capacity and the cardioprotective potential on IR injury. METHODS: We studied hearts from rats developed by selective breeding for high (HCR) or low (LCR) capacity for treadmill running. The rats were randomized to: (1) control, (2) local ischemic preconditioning (IPC) or (3) remote ischemic preconditioning (RIC) followed by 30 minutes of ischemia and 120 minutes of reperfusion in an isolated perfused heart model. The primary endpoint was infarct size. Secondary endpoints included uptake of labelled glucose, content of selected mitochondrial proteins in skeletal and cardiac muscle, and activation of AMP-activated kinase (AMPK). RESULTS: At baseline, running distance was 203±7 m in LCR vs 1905±51 m in HCR rats (p<0.01). Infarct size was significantly lower in LCR than in HCR controls (49±5% vs 68±5%, p = 0.04). IPC reduced infarct size by 47% in LCR (p<0.01) and by 31% in HCR rats (p = 0.01). RIC did not modulate infarct size (LCR: 52±5, p>0.99; HCR: 69±6%, p>0.99, respectively). Phosphorylaion of AMPK did not differ between LCR and HCR controls. IPC did not modulate cardiac phosphorylation of AMPK. Glucose uptake during reperfusion was similar in LCR and HCR rats. IPC increased glucose uptake during reperfusion in LCR animals (p = 0.02). Mitochondrial protein content in skeletal muscle was lower in LCR than in HCR (0.77±0.10 arbitrary units (AU) vs 1.09±0.07 AU, p = 0.02), but not in cardiac muscle. CONCLUSION: Aerobic capacity is associated with altered myocardial sensitivity to IR injury, but the cardioprotective effect of IPC is not. Glucose uptake, AMPK activation immediately prior to ischemia and basal mitochondrial protein content in the heart seem to be of minor importance as underlying mechanisms for the cardioprotective effects.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7591019
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75910192020-10-30 Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft Grønnebæk, Thomas Skjærlund Jespersen, Nichlas Riise Lassen, Thomas Ravn Seefeldt, Jacob Marthinsen Tonnesen, Pernille Tilma Jensen, Rebekka Vibjerg Koch, Lauren Gerard Britton, Steven L. Pedersen, Michael Jessen, Niels Bøtker, Hans Erik PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Aerobic capacity is a strong predictor of cardiovascular mortality. Whether aerobic capacity influences myocardial ischemia and reperfusion (IR) injury is unknown. PURPOSE: To investigate the impact of intrinsic differences in aerobic capacity and the cardioprotective potential on IR injury. METHODS: We studied hearts from rats developed by selective breeding for high (HCR) or low (LCR) capacity for treadmill running. The rats were randomized to: (1) control, (2) local ischemic preconditioning (IPC) or (3) remote ischemic preconditioning (RIC) followed by 30 minutes of ischemia and 120 minutes of reperfusion in an isolated perfused heart model. The primary endpoint was infarct size. Secondary endpoints included uptake of labelled glucose, content of selected mitochondrial proteins in skeletal and cardiac muscle, and activation of AMP-activated kinase (AMPK). RESULTS: At baseline, running distance was 203±7 m in LCR vs 1905±51 m in HCR rats (p<0.01). Infarct size was significantly lower in LCR than in HCR controls (49±5% vs 68±5%, p = 0.04). IPC reduced infarct size by 47% in LCR (p<0.01) and by 31% in HCR rats (p = 0.01). RIC did not modulate infarct size (LCR: 52±5, p>0.99; HCR: 69±6%, p>0.99, respectively). Phosphorylaion of AMPK did not differ between LCR and HCR controls. IPC did not modulate cardiac phosphorylation of AMPK. Glucose uptake during reperfusion was similar in LCR and HCR rats. IPC increased glucose uptake during reperfusion in LCR animals (p = 0.02). Mitochondrial protein content in skeletal muscle was lower in LCR than in HCR (0.77±0.10 arbitrary units (AU) vs 1.09±0.07 AU, p = 0.02), but not in cardiac muscle. CONCLUSION: Aerobic capacity is associated with altered myocardial sensitivity to IR injury, but the cardioprotective effect of IPC is not. Glucose uptake, AMPK activation immediately prior to ischemia and basal mitochondrial protein content in the heart seem to be of minor importance as underlying mechanisms for the cardioprotective effects. Public Library of Science 2020-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7591019/ /pubmed/33108389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240866 Text en © 2020 Hjortbak et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hjortbak, Marie Vognstoft
Grønnebæk, Thomas Skjærlund
Jespersen, Nichlas Riise
Lassen, Thomas Ravn
Seefeldt, Jacob Marthinsen
Tonnesen, Pernille Tilma
Jensen, Rebekka Vibjerg
Koch, Lauren Gerard
Britton, Steven L.
Pedersen, Michael
Jessen, Niels
Bøtker, Hans Erik
Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title_full Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title_fullStr Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title_full_unstemmed Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title_short Differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
title_sort differences in intrinsic aerobic capacity alters sensitivity to ischemia-reperfusion injury but not cardioprotective capacity by ischemic preconditioning in rats
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7591019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33108389
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240866
work_keys_str_mv AT hjortbakmarievognstoft differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT grønnebækthomasskjærlund differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT jespersennichlasriise differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT lassenthomasravn differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT seefeldtjacobmarthinsen differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT tonnesenpernilletilma differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT jensenrebekkavibjerg differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT kochlaurengerard differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT brittonstevenl differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT pedersenmichael differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT jessenniels differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats
AT bøtkerhanserik differencesinintrinsicaerobiccapacityalterssensitivitytoischemiareperfusioninjurybutnotcardioprotectivecapacitybyischemicpreconditioninginrats