Why the study?
The study was designed to explore the inhibitory effects of protriptyline on voltage-dependent K+ channels in rabbit coronary arterial smooth muscle cells.
Protriptyline inhibits vascular Kv channels, primarily Kv1.5, in a concentration- and use-dependent manner by altering their gating properties.
In this study, we explore the inhibitory effects of protriptyline, a tricyclic antidepressant drug, on voltage-dependent K+ (Kv) channels of rabbit coronary arterial smooth muscle cells using a whole-cell patch clamp technique. Protriptyline inhibited the vascular Kv current in a concentration-dependent manner, with an IC50 value of 5.05 ± 0.97 μM and a Hill coefficient of 0.73 ± 0.04. Protriptyline did not affect the steady-state activation kinetics. However, the drug shifted the steady-state inactivation curve to the left, suggesting that protriptyline inhibited the Kv channels by changing their voltage sensitivity. Application of 20 repetitive train pulses (1 or 2 Hz) progressively increased the protriptyline-induced inhibition of the Kv current, suggesting that protriptyline inhibited Kv channels in a use (state)-dependent manner. The extent of Kv current inhibition by protriptyline was similar during the first, second, and third step pulses. These results suggest that protriptyline-induced inhibition of the Kv current mainly occurs principally in the closed state. The increase in the inactivation recovery time constant in the presence of protriptyline also supported use (state)-dependent inhibition of Kv channels by the drug. In the presence of the Kv1.5 inhibitor, protriptyline did not induce further inhibition of the Kv channels. However, pretreatment with a Kv2.1 or Kv7 inhibitor induced further inhibition of Kv current to a similar extent to that observed with protriptyline alone. Thus, we conclude that protriptyline inhibits the vascular Kv channels in a concentration- and use-dependent manner by changing their gating properties. Furthermore, protriptyline-induced inhibition of Kv channels mainly involves the Kv1.5.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
An et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: