Why the study?
The role of TRPV1 on left ventricular mechanoenergetics in hyperthermia remained to be investigated.
The negative inotropic effect of hyperthermia on the left ventricle is partially mediated by the TRPV1 signaling pathway, as demonstrated by the protective effect of capsazepine and the mimicking effect of capsaicin.
Supports TRPV1 mediation of hyperthermia-induced LV dysfunction in animals; leaves open relevance to human hyperthermia or fever.
We have previously reported that the negative inotropic effects of hyperthermia (42 °C) on left ventricular (LV) mechanoenergetics using the excised, cross-circulated rat heart model. Here, we investigated the role of TRPV1 on LV mechanoenergetics in hyperthermia. We analyzed the LV end-systolic pressure–volume relation (ESPVR) and the linear relation between the myocardial oxygen consumption per beat (VO2) and the systolic pressure–volume area (PVA; a total mechanical energy per beat) during infusion of capsazepine (CPZ) in hyperthermia, or capsaicin (Cap) under 300 bpm pacing. LV ESP decreased in each LV volume and the resultant downward-shift of LV ESPVR was suppressed by CPZ infusion in hyperthermia-hearts. In Cap-treated hearts, LV ESPVR shifted downward from the control ESPVR, similar to hyperthermia-hearts. The slopes of VO2–PVA relationship were unchanged. The VO2 intercepts in hyperthermia-hearts did not decrease because of decreased E–C coupling VO2, and inversely increased basal metabolic VO2, which was suppressed by CPZ, though the VO2 intercepts in Cap-treated hearts significantly decreased. The levels of phosphorylated phospholamban at serine 16 decreased significantly in hyperthermia-hearts, as well as Cap-treated hearts. These results indicate that a Cap-induced decrease in the LV contractility, like in cases of hyperthermia, are due to the down-regulation of the total calcium handling in E–C coupling, suggesting that negative inotropic effect in hyperthermia-heart is, at least in part, mediated through TRPV1 signaling pathway.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Obata et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: