Key result
Ischemic postconditioning of isolated human myocardium generally worsened ischemic damage compared to control, though it showed some degree of protection in approximately one-third of cases.
Why the study?
Does ischemic postconditioning reduce ischemic injury in isolated human myocardium?
Does ischemic postconditioning reduce ischemic injury in isolated human myocardium?
Ischemic postconditioning generally worsened ischemic damage in isolated human myocardium, raising caution regarding its broad clinical application.
Does not support ischemic postconditioning in human myocardium; leaves open variable responses for targeted investigation.
BACKGROUND: Ischemic postconditioning (IPostC), has been proposed as a useful approach to reduce infarct size in all species, but its clinical utility remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role played by the protocol used on the efficacy of IPostC in protecting the diseased human myocardium. METHODS: Myocardial atrial samples from patients were subjected to a 90 min ischemia/120 min reoxygenation followed by different IPostC protocols to investigate the role of the time of ischemia (30, 60, 90 and 120 s) and the number of cycles (1, 2, 3 and 4) with 60 and 120 s of total ischemic time. Muscles were also subjected to ischemic preconditioning (IPreC). The release of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and the measurement of tetrazolium bromide (MTT) were determined. RESULTS: IPostC increased the LDH and decreased the MTT values from those of control, independently of the duration of the conditioning ischemia. LDH and MTT values also worsened by augmenting the number of IPostC cycles whereas they were significantly improved by IPreC. However, analysis of individual results indicated that in approximately 1/3 of the cases IPostC exhibited some degree of protection especially in the presence of increased ischemic injury. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings show that IPostC of the human myocardium may be influenced by the protocol used and also by the degree of the preceding ischemic injury. IPostC was beneficial in approximately 1/3 of the cases; however in the remaining cases it increased ischemic damage and, therefore, these results raise a word of caution on its broad clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Casós et al. (2015) studied Diseased human myocardium. Ischemic postconditioning (IPostC) vs. Control and ischemic preconditioning (IPreC) was evaluated on Release of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and measurement of tetrazolium bromide (MTT). Ischemic postconditioning of isolated human myocardium generally worsened ischemic damage compared to control, though it showed some degree of protection in approximately one-third of cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: