Why the study?
Does prostacyclin or ZK36374 reduce arrhythmias during coronary artery occlusion and reperfusion in anaesthetised greyhounds?
Does prostacyclin or ZK36374 reduce arrhythmias during coronary artery occlusion and reperfusion in anaesthetised greyhounds?
Prostacyclin and its analogue ZK36374 have dose- and route-dependent effects on ischemia-induced arrhythmias, being arrhythmogenic when given intravenously at high doses but antiarrhythmic when given intracoronary at lower doses.
Intravenous ZK36374 raised VF risk during canine ischemia; leaves open whether intracoronary delivery merits human arrhythmia trials.
The effects of prostacyclin and ZK36374, a more stable analogue of prostacyclin, were examined in greyhounds anaesthetised with chloralose. Intravenous drug administration (100 ng kg-1 min-1) exacergbated the arrhythmias induced by occlusion of the left anterior descending coronary artery. The incidence of ventricular fibrillation (VF) was 50% in both drug groups compared with 10% in controls. An antiarrhythmic effect was observed when a lower dose (5 ng kg-1 min-1) was infused directly into the coronary circulation. The number of extrasystoles occurring during the first 30 min of occlusion was reduced from 720 +/- 136 in the controls to 327 +/- 167 in the prostacyclin group and 309 +/- 110 (p less than 0.05) in the dogs receiving ZK36374. The only haemodynamic change observed in the dogs receiving intracoronary drug infusions was a small decrease in systemic arterial blood pressure. In the intravenous groups systemic hypotension was accompanied by tachycardia, suggesting that there may have been a reflex increase in sympathetic drive. Increased catecholamine release could account for the higher incidence of VF in the dogs treated with intravenous prostacyclin or ZK36374. The intracoronary administration of both drugs markedly reduced the incidence of VF induced by the release of a 40-min coronary artery occlusion. This latter result suggests that the release of endogenous prostacyclin may have protective effects during reperfusion of the ischaemic myocardium.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coker et al. (1983) studied this question.