Management of Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease (Compilation of 2005 and 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline Recommendations) : A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Impact Factor: 15.34). 02/2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.004
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study was designed to compare the effects of hyperpolarizing versus depolarizing cardioplegic solutions on the coronary vasomotor regulation, specifically focusing on coronary myoplasmic Ca2+-myosin light chain (MLC) phosphorylation pathway and beta-adrenergic signal transduction. With the use of an in vitro cardioplegic model, rat coronary microvessels loaded with fura-2 were subjected to simulated cold (20 degrees C) cardioplegia and reperfused with Krebs solution for 60 minutes at 37 degrees C. Cardioplegia consisted of either (1) Krebs solution alone (control), (2) Krebs plus adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channel opener (100 micromol/L pinacidil [PCO-CP]), (3) hyperkalemic cardioplegia (K(+) = 25 mmol/L [K-CP]), or (4) K-CP plus magnesium (Mg(2+) = 25 mmol/L; [K/Mg-CP]). At the endpoint of the cardioplegic period, K-CP resulted in a significant increase both in [Ca(2+)](i) and in MLC phosphorylation compared with control (both P <.05). In contrast, PCO-CP did not make any significant difference in these indices compared with control. After reperfusion, the relaxation responses to isoproterenol and forskolin after K-CP were significantly reduced (both P <.05 vs control) but were preserved after PCO-CP. K/Mg-CP provided comparable effects to PCO-CP. These results suggest that neither an activation of the coronary myoplasmic Ca(2+)-MLC phosphorylation pathway nor beta-adrenergic desensitization seen after exposure to depolarizing cardioplegia occurs with exposure to hyperpolarizing cardioplegia and magnesium-supplemented depolarizing hyperkalemic cardioplegia.Surgery 08/2000; 128(2):185-91. DOI:10.1067/msy.2000.107417 · 3.11 Impact Factor
- Journal of Surgical Research 02/2011; 165(2):267-267. DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2010.11.451 · 2.12 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.