Why the study?
Does sacubitril/valsartan improve endothelium-dependent hyperpolarization-mediated responses compared to valsartan alone in spontaneously hypertensive rats?
Does sacubitril/valsartan improve endothelium-dependent hyperpolarization-mediated responses compared to valsartan alone in spontaneously hypertensive rats?
In a rat model of hypertension, sacubitril/valsartan did not provide additional benefit over valsartan alone in improving endothelium-dependent hyperpolarization-mediated vasomotor function.
No added EDH benefit of sacubitril/valsartan over valsartan in hypertensive rats; hypothesis-generating and should not change practice.
Background We have previously demonstrated that antihypertensive treatment with renin‐angiotensin system inhibitors restores the impaired endothelium‐dependent hyperpolarization ( EDH )–mediated responses in spontaneously hypertensive rats ( SHR s). Herein, we investigated whether the angiotensin II receptor–neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan ( LCZ 696) would improve reduced EDH ‐mediated responses and whether LCZ 696 would exert additional effects on endothelium‐dependent and endothelium‐independent vasorelaxation compared with an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker alone during hypertension. Methods and Results SHR s were treated for 3 months with either LCZ 696 or valsartan, from the age of 8 to 11 months. Age‐matched, untreated SHR s and Wistar‐Kyoto rats served as controls. Membrane potentials and contractile responses were recorded from the isolated superior mesenteric arteries. Acetylcholine‐induced, EDH ‐mediated responses were impaired in untreated SHR s compared with Wistar‐Kyoto rats. EDH ‐mediated responses were similarly improved in the LCZ 696‐ and valsartan‐treated SHR s. No difference was observed in acetylcholine‐induced, nitric oxide‐mediated relaxations among the 4 groups. Endothelium‐independent relaxations in response to a nitric oxide donor, sodium nitroprusside, and those to levcromakalim, an ATP ‐sensitive K + ‐channel opener, were similar among the 4 groups; however, the sensitivities to levcromakalim were significantly higher in both LCZ 696‐ and valsartan‐treated SHR s. Conclusions LCZ 696 appears to be as effective as valsartan in improving the impaired EDH ‐mediated responses during hypertension. LCZ 696 and valsartan exert similar beneficial effects on endothelium‐independent relaxation via enhanced sensitivity of the ATP ‐sensitive K + channel. However, the dual blockade of renin‐angiotensin system and neutral endopeptidase with LCZ 696 does not appear to provide additional benefit over valsartan alone on vasomotor function in mesenteric arteries of SHR s.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seki et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: