The role of nitric oxide and potassium channels in the effect of adrenomedullin in human internal thoracic arteries

Bayram, Zeliha; Golbasi, Ilhan; Özdem, Sebahat

doi:10.1016/j.regpep.2009.12.023

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Importantly, PVA-MV O 2 data indicate that the observed increase is not metabolically induced, as unloaded MV O 2 , contractile efficiency, and total mechanical work were similar between groups. In vitro studies (2,42) mediates coronary vasodilation through nitric oxide (NO) synthase (NOS) and EDHF pathways. In the isolated rat aorta, AM causes endothelium-dependent vasodilation by Ca 2ϩ -mediated activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt pathway, which, in turn, activates endothelial NOS (eNOS) and NO production (32).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adrenomedullin-epinephrine cotreatment enhances cardiac output and left ventricular function by energetically neutral mechanisms

Stenberg

Kildal

How

et al. 2012

American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adrenomedullin (AM) used therapeutically reduces mortality in the acute phase of experimental myocardial infarction. However, AM is potentially deleterious in acute heart failure as it is vasodilative and inotropically neutral. AM and epinephrine (EPI) are cosecreted from chromaffin cells, indicating a physiological interaction. We assessed the hemodynamic and energetic profile of AM-EPI cotreatment, exploring whether drug interaction improves cardiac function. Left ventricular (LV) mechanoenergetics were evaluated in 14 open-chest pigs using pressure-volume analysis and the pressure-volume area-myocardial O(2) consumption (PVA-MVo(2)) framework. AM (15 ng·kg(-1)·min(-1), n = 8) or saline (controls, n = 6) was infused for 120 min. Subsequently, a concurrent infusion of EPI (50 ng·kg(-1)·min(-1)) was added in both groups (AM-EPI vs. EPI). AM increased cardiac output (CO) and coronary blood flow by 20 ± 10% and 39 ± 14% (means ± SD, P < 0.05 vs. baseline), whereas controls were unaffected. AM-EPI increased CO and coronary blood flow by 55 ± 17% and 75 ± 16% (P < 0.05, AM-EPI interaction) compared with 13 ± 12% (P < 0.05 vs. baseline) and 18 ± 31% (P = not significant) with EPI. LV systolic capacitance decreased by -37 ± 22% and peak positive derivative of LV pressure (dP/dt(max)) increased by 32 ± 7% with AM-EPI (P < 0.05, AM-EPI interaction), whereas no significant effects were observed with EPI. Mean arterial pressure was maintained by AM-EPI and tended to decrease with EPI (+2 ± 13% vs. -11 ± 10%, P = not significant). PVA-MVo(2) relationships were unaffected by all treatments. In conclusion, AM-EPI cotreatment has an inodilator profile with CO and LV function augmented beyond individual drug effects and is not associated with relative increases in energetic cost. This can possibly take the inodilator treatment strategy beyond hemodynamic goals and exploit the cardioprotective effects of AM in acute heart failure.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%