Vasodilators including NO, PGI2, and EDHF contribute distinctively to endothelium-dependent relaxation in conduit and resistance arteries, and these pathways are differentially impaired in hypertension.
Differential endothelial mediator impairment in hypertension may inform targeted research; leaves open translation from this animal model to humans.
The endothelium contributes to the maintenance of vasodilator tone by releasing nitric oxide (NO), prostacyclin (PGI2), and endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor (EDHF). In hypertension, endothelium-dependent relaxation is attenuated (a phenomenon referred to as endothelial dysfunction) and contributes to the increased peripheral resistance. However, which vasodilator among NO, PGI2, and EDHF is impaired in hypertension remains largely unknown. The present study was designed to study the exact contribution of NO, PGI2, and EDHF to vascular reactivity in conduit and resistance artery, under physiological and pathological conditions. The aorta and the second-order mesenteric artery from spontaneous hypertensive rats (SHR) and Wistar-Kyoto (WKY) rats were used to measure the vasorelaxation with myograph technology, in the presence or absence of different inhibitors. The results showed that the endothelium-dependent vasodilatation in the conduit artery was mediated mainly by NO, whereas the resistant artery by NO, PGI2, and EDHF together. In hypertension, both NO-mediated relaxation in the conduit artery and NO-, PGI2-, and EDHF-mediated dilation in the resistant artery were markedly impaired. Furthermore, the endothelium-dependent and the endothelium-independent vasorelaxation in conduit artery was attenuated more pronouncedly than that in the resistant artery from hypertensive rats, suggesting that the conduit artery is more vulnerable to hypertensive condition. In conclusion, vasodilators including NO, PGI2, and EDHF contribute distinctively to endothelium-dependent relaxation in conduit and resistance artery under physiological and pathological conditions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: