Renal sympathetic denervation alleviates myocardial fibrosis following isoproterenol-induced heart failure

Figures

• 

  Figure 1.. Comparison of cardiac functional parameters among the groups of rats. (A) LVIDs, (B) LVPWs, (C) LVEF and (D) LVFS were measured in control, sham, HF + sham and HF + RSD groups. Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. **P<0.01 vs. control and sham groups; ††P<0.01 vs. HF + sham group. LVIDs, 1eft ventricular internal diameter at end-systole; LVPWs, left ventricular systolic posterior wall thickness; LVEF, 1eft ventricular ejection fraction; LVFS, left ventricular fractional shortening; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation; HF, heart failure.

• 

  Figure 2.. Masson's staining of collagen deposition. (A) Control (B) Sham (C) HF + Sham (D) HF + RSD. CVF values were as follows: Control 4.94±0.38%; Sham 4.67±0.63%; HF + Sham 60.76±6.01% and HF + RSD 43.99±6.23%. Normal myocardial tissues are depicted in red and collagen is depicted in blue. (Original magnification, ×400). CVF, collagen volume fraction; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation; HF, heart failure.

• 

  Figure 3.. mRNA expression levels of TGF-β and CTGF in myocardial tissues 6 weeks after establishing HF, as determined by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Compared with the HF + sham group, the HF + RSD group had significantly reduced mRNA expression levels of (A) TGF-β and (B) CTGF. Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. **P<0.01 vs. control and sham groups; ††P<0.01 vs. HF + sham group. TGF-β, transforming growth factor-β; CTGF, connective tissue growth factor; HF, heart failure; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation.

• 

  Figure 4.. Immunohistochemical analysis of TGF-β and CTGF in myocardial tissues. Positive staining of (A) TGF-β and (B) CTGF in each group appears brown. Hematoxylin nuclear staining appeared blue. In the HF + RSD group, positive staining of TGF-β and CTGF was significantly reduced compared with the HF + sham group. Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. **P<0.01 vs. sham group; ††P<0.01 vs. HF + sham group; TGF-β, transforming growth factor-β; CTGF, connective tissue growth factor; HF, heart failure; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation.

• 

  Figure 5.. Western blot analysis of TGF-β and CTGF protein expression levels in myocardial tissues. Protein expression levels of (A) TGF-β and (B) CTGF in myocardial tissues were determined 6 weeks after the establishment of HF. Compared with the HF + sham group, TGF-β and CTGF protein expression levels in the HF + RSD group were significantly reduced. Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. The expression levels of TGF-β were as follows: Control, 0.15±0.03; sham, 0.15±0.01; HF + RSD 0.46±0.06 and HF + sham 1.10±0.02. The expression levels of CTGF were as follows: Control, 0.17±0.03; sham, 0.19±0.04; HF + RSD 0.58±0.04 and HF + sham 1.52±0.06. **P<0.01 vs. sham group; ††P<0.01 vs. HF + sham group; TGF-β, transforming growth factor-β; CTGF, connective tissue growth factor; HF, heart failure; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation.

• 

  Figure 6.. Expression levels of miR-29b, miR-30c and miR-133a in myocardial tissues. Compared with the HF + sham group, expression of (A) miR-29b, (B) miR-30c and (C) miR-133a in the HF + RSD group was significantly greater. Data are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation. *P<0.05 vs. control and sham groups; **P<0.01 vs. control and sham groups; †P<0.05 vs. HF + sham group; ††P<0.01 vs. HF + sham group. miR, microRNA; HF, heart failure; RSD, renal sympathetic denervation.