Why the study?
Does the highly selective T-type calcium channel blocker AZ9112 prevent atrial remodeling induced by atrial tachypacing in dogs?
Does the highly selective T-type calcium channel blocker AZ9112 prevent atrial remodeling induced by atrial tachypacing in dogs?
Selective T-type calcium channel blockade with AZ9112 does not prevent rate-related atrial remodeling in a canine model, indicating that I(CaT) inhibition alone is unlikely to be a useful approach for AF therapy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Selective T-type blockade fails to prevent remodeling in this model; leaves open whether I(CaT) inhibition can impact AF.
BACKGROUND: The T-type Ca(2+) channel (I(CaT)) blocker mibefradil prevents AF-promoting remodeling occurring with atrial tachycardia, an action that has been attributed to I(CaT) inhibition. However, mibefradil has other effects, including ability to inhibit L-type Ca(2+) channels, Na(+) channels and cytochromes. Thus, the relationship between I(CaT) inhibition and remodeling protection in AF is still unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of a novel highly selective Cav3 (I(CaT)) blocker, AZ9112, on atrial remodeling induced by 1-week atrial tachypacing (AT-P) in dogs. METHODS: Mongrel dogs were subjected to AT-P at 400 bpm for 7 days, with atrioventricular-node ablation and right-ventricular demand pacing (80 bpm) to control ventricular rate. Four groups of dogs were studied in investigator-blinded fashion: (1) a sham group, instrumented but without tachypacing or drug therapy (n = 5); (2) a placebo group, tachypaced but receiving placebo (n = 6); (3) a positive control tachypacing group receiving mibefradil (n = 6); and (4) a test drug group, subjected to tachypacing during oral treatment with AZ9112 (n = 8). RESULTS: One-week AT-P decreased atrial effective refractory period (ERP) at 6 of 8 sites and diminished rate-dependent atrial ERP abbreviation. Mibefradil eliminated AT-P-induced ERP-abbreviation at 4 of these 6 sites, while AZ9112 failed to affect ERP at any. Neither drug significantly affected AF vulnerability or AF duration. CONCLUSIONS: I(CaT) blockade with the highly selective compound AZ9112 failed to prevent rate-related atrial remodeling. Thus, prevention of atrial electrophysiological remodeling by mibefradil cannot be attributed exclusively to I(CaT) blockade. These results indicate that I(CaT) inhibition is not likely to be a useful approach for AF therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kato et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: