Trimetazidine demonstrates anti-arrhythmic and cardioprotective effects against ischemia-reperfusion injury in a diabetic rat model.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
TMZ may attenuate reperfusion arrhythmias in diabetic rat models; leaves open any clinical translation or human efficacy.
Trimetazidine (TMZ), as an anti-ischemic drug, plays a critical role in protecting against cardiovascular complications induced by diabetes. This study was therefore aimed to evaluate the protective effects of TMZ on reperfusion-induced arrhythmias in the diabetic rats. Male Sprague-Dawley rats (250±20 g) were randomly assigned to four (n=8): control rats (C), alloxan induced diabetic rats (D), diabetic rats treated with TMZ (10 mg/kg, D+T10), diabetic rats treated with TMZ (30 mg/kg, D+T30). TMZ was treated orally once daily for 8 weeks. Diabetes was induced by a single intraperitoneal injection of alloxan (120 mg/kg). Ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) was carried out via 30 min of ischemia and following120-min reperfusion. The magnitude and score of arrhythmia, the left ventricular function, infarct size, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), myocardial creatine kinase (CK-MB) and troponin (cTnI) were measured. The findings were evaluated by two-way repeated measures and one-way ANOVA followed by LSD post hoc test and Fisher's exact test for incidence percentage. The duration, incidence and score of arrhythmia (p<0.001), infarct size (p<0.01) were significantly increased, the cardiac contractility (±dp/dt), LDH, CK-MB (p<0.001) and cTnI (p<0.05) were significantly decreased in the diabetic rats in comparison with the control group. However, treatment with TMZ in the diabetic rats was significantly improved the duration (p<0.001), incidence and score of arrhythmia,±dp/dt LDH, CK-MB, cTnI (p<0.05) and infarct size (p<0.01) in comparison with the untreated diabetic group. The present study indicates anti-arrhythmic effect of TMZ in reducing arrhythmias induced by reperfusion in the diabetic rats.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramezani‐Aliakbari et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: