Why the study?
SGLT2 inhibitors prevent heart failure progression, but the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood.
Does empagliflozin improve post-infarction cardiac remodeling in a rat model of myocardial infarction irrespective of diabetes status?
Does empagliflozin improve post-infarction cardiac remodeling in a rat model of myocardial infarction irrespective of diabetes status?
Empagliflozin attenuates adverse cardiac remodeling and improves systolic function after myocardial infarction in rats, irrespective of diabetes status, through the upregulation of cGCH1 and modulation of the NOS pathway.
Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have shown to prevent heart failure progression, although the mechanisms remain poorly understood. Here we evaluated the effect of empagliflozin (EMPA, SGLT2i) in cardiac remodeling after myocardial infarction, the interplay with diabetes status and the role of cardiac GTP enzyme cyclohydrolase 1 (cGCH1). A rat model of diabetes (50 mg/kg streptozotocin, i.p.) was subjected to myocardial infarction and left ventricular systolic dysfunction, by ligation of the left anterior descending coronary artery. EMPA therapy significantly improved cardiac remodeling parameters and ameliorated processes of fibrosis and hypertrophy, in both non-diabetic and diabetic rats. This cardioprotective effect related with a significant increase in myocardial expression levels of cGCH1, which led to activation of nNOS and eNOS, and inhibition of iNOS, and subsequently resulted in increasing of NO levels and decreasing O 2 .- and nitrotyrosine levels. These effects were replicated in a cardiomyocyte biomechanical stretching diabetic model, where silencing cGCH1 blocked the preventive effect of EMPA. The beneficial effects were observed irrespective of diabetes status, although the magnitude was greater in presence of diabetes. Empagliflozin improves myocardial remodeling after myocardial infarction through overexpression of cGCH1, and irrespective of diabetes status.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lopez et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: