T he prevailing concept of the heart's response to changes in its environment is a complex network of interconnecting signal transduction cascades. 1 In such a scheme, the focus is on communication of various cell surface receptors, heterotrimeric G-proteins, protein kinases, and transcription factors. [2][3][4] Diabetes is a disorder of metabolic dysregulation. At first glance it appears that metabolism and the metabolic consequences of diabetes do not fit into this signal-response coupling scheme. Two questions arise. First, is metabolism simply an "effect" rather than a "cause" of adaptation? Second, is metabolism only a by-product of signal transduction-induced adaptation, allowing equilibrium (and therefore maintenance of function) in the presence of the other adaptational responses?An alternative is to take a new, less restricted view of metabolism. Beyond its stereotypical function as a provider of ATP, alterations in metabolic flux within the cell create essential signals for the adaptation of the heart to situations such as diabetes. This concept is novel for the heart, but has already been considered in the liver. Like the phosphorylation events occurring in signal transduction cascades, changes in metabolic flux are extremely rapid. For example, translocation of GLUT4 to the cell surface in response to insulin occurs within a second. 5 We have previously found that increases or decreases in workload also change metabolic fluxes in seconds. 6,7 Therefore, changes in metabolites are rapid enough to allow them to act as signaling molecules.Many of these acute changes in metabolic flux are brought about by the same signal transduction cascades believed to be involved in the adaptation of the heart to changes in its environment. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, Ca 2ϩ , and protein kinase C, all of which play a role in cardiac adaptation, regulate metabolism in the heart. 8,9 Metabolic signals therefore provide a new dimension to the preexisting concepts of cardiac adaptation, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Patients with heart disease are frequently treated with supplemental oxygen. Although oxygen can exhibit vasoactive properties in many vascular beds, its effects on the coronary circulation have not been fully characterized. To examine whether supplemental oxygen administration affects coronary blood flow (CBF) in a clinical setting, we measured in 18 patients with stable coronary heart disease the effects of breathing 100% oxygen by face mask for 15 min on CBF (via coronary Doppler flow wire), conduit coronary diameter, CBF response to intracoronary infusion of the endothelium-dependent dilator ACh and to the endothelium-independent dilator adenosine, as well as arterial and coronary venous concentrations of the nitric oxide (NO) metabolites nitrotyrosine, NO(2)(-), and NO(3)(-). Relative to breathing room air, breathing of 100% oxygen increased coronary resistance by approximately 40%, decreased CBF by approximately 30%, increased the appearance of nitrotyrosine in coronary venous plasma, and significantly blunted the CBF response to ACh. Oxygen breathing elicited these changes without affecting the diameter of large-conduit coronary arteries, coronary venous concentrations of NO(2)(-) and NO(3)(-), or the coronary vasodilator response to adenosine. Administering supplemental oxygen to patients undergoing cardiac catheterization substantially increases coronary vascular resistance by a mechanism that may involve oxidative quenching of NO within the coronary microcirculation.
Pathological formation of reactive oxygen species within the coronary circulation has been hypothesized to mediate some clinical manifestations of ischemic heart disease (IHD) by interfering with physiological regulation of coronary tone. To determine the degree to which coronary tone responds to acute changes in ambient levels of oxidants and antioxidants in vivo in a clinical setting, we measured the effect of an acute oxidative stress (breathing 100% oxygen) on coronary capacitance artery diameter (quantitative angiography) and blood flow velocity through the coronary microcirculation (intracoronary Doppler ultrasonography) before and after treatment with the antioxidant vitamin C (3-g intravenous infusion) in 12 IHD patients undergoing a clinical coronary interventional procedure. Relative to room air breathing, 100% oxygen breathing promptly reduced coronary blood flow velocity by 20% and increased coronary resistance by 23%, without significantly changing the diameter of capacitance arteries. Vitamin C administration promptly restored coronary flow velocity and resistance to a slightly suprabasal level, and it prevented the reinduction of coronary constriction with rechallenge with 100% oxygen. This suggests that acute oxidative stress produces prompt and substantial changes in coronary resistance and blood flow in a clinical setting in patients with IHD, and it suggests that these changes are mediated by vitamin C-quenchable substances acting on the coronary microcirculation. This observation may have relevance for clinical practice.
In 1999, we noted the development of inflammation and/or abscesses at the site of radial access in a group of patients. Over a 3-year period, we noted this inflammation in 33 patients out of 2,038 (1.6%) who had catheterization via the radial approach. The radial abscesses occurred in 30 patients out of 1,063 (2.8%) in whom we could confirm the use of a hydrophilic-coated sheath, but in no patient for whom we can document that an uncoated sheath was used. No infectious agent could be implicated, and the time course for the development of the abscess, typically 2 to 3 weeks, seemed long for a bacterial infection. Later patients had biopsies, and granulomatous reactions were seen in most. Additionally, a few of the biopsies showed an amorphous extravascular substance consistent with the catheter coating. All patients had good long-term outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.