Why the study?
Does alamandine protect the heart against ischemia-reperfusion injury in a rat model?
Does alamandine protect the heart against ischemia-reperfusion injury in a rat model?
Alamandine protects against myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury by reducing infarct size and improving hemodynamics, partially via MrgD receptor-mediated ANP secretion and anti-apoptotic pathways.
Hypothesis-generating for alamandine in rodent reperfusion injury; clinical translation and human trials remain untested.
BACKGROUND: Alamandine differs from angiotensin-(1-7) in a single N-terminal alanine residue. The aim of this study was to investigate whether alamandine protects the heart against reperfusion injury. METHODS AND RESULTS: After euthanizing Sprague-Dawley rats, hearts were perfused with Krebs-Henseleit buffer for a 20-min pre-ischemic period with or without alamandine, followed by 20 min global ischemia and 50 min reperfusion. Alamandine (0.1 mg/kg) improved the postischemic left ventricular developed pressure and ±dP/dt, decreased the infarct size, and decreased the lactate dehydrogenase levels in the effluent. Alamandine increased the coronary flow and the amount of atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) in the coronary effluent, and it decreased the expression of apoptotic proteins and increased the expression of antioxidative proteins. Pretreatment with the MrgD receptor antagonist or PD123319, but not the angiotensin type 1 receptor antagonist, attenuated the cardioprotective effects of alamandine. A similar cardioprotective effect with alamandine was also observed with high plasma ANP levels in an in vivo study. Alamandine directly stimulated ANP secretion from isolated atria, which was completely blocked by pretreatment with the MrgD receptor antagonist and was partially blocked by PD123319. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the cardioprotective effects of alamandine against I/R injury are, in part, related to the activation of antioxidant and antiapoptotic enzymes via the MrgD receptor.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: