Why the study?
Do free radicals contribute to electrophysiologic abnormalities and contractile dysfunction by inhibiting glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation in isolated rabbit and guinea pig ventricles?
Do free radicals contribute to electrophysiologic abnormalities and contractile dysfunction by inhibiting glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation in isolated rabbit and guinea pig ventricles?
Free radicals generated during ischemia and reperfusion may contribute to electrophysiologic abnormalities and contractile dysfunction by inhibiting glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation, limiting functional recovery.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May implicate free radicals in ischemia-reperfusion injury; hypothesis-generating in animal ventricles, human validation required.
Oxygen-derived free radicals have been implicated in the pathogenesis of cardiac dysfunction during ischemia, postischemic myocardial "stunning," and reperfusion injury. We investigated the effects of oxygen-derived free radicals on cardiac function in intact isolated rabbit hearts and single guinea pig ventricular myocytes. In the intact rabbit ventricle, exposure to free radical-generating systems caused increased cellular K+ efflux, shortening of the action potential duration, changes in tension, and depletion of high energy phosphates similar to ischemia and metabolic inhibition. In patch-clamped single ventricular myocytes, free radical-generating systems activated ATP-sensitive K+ channels, decreased the calcium current, and caused cell shortening by irreversibly inhibiting glycolytic and oxidative metabolism. The results suggest that free radicals generated during ischemia and reperfusion may contribute to electrophysiologic abnormalities and contractile dysfunction by inhibiting glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation. Inhibition of metabolism by free radicals may be an important factor limiting functional recovery from an ischemic insult after reestablishment of effective blood flow.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goldhaber et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: