Why the study?
Does high shear stress alter P2 receptor expression in human umbilical vein smooth muscle cells compared to low shear stress?
Does high shear stress alter P2 receptor expression in human umbilical vein smooth muscle cells compared to low shear stress?
High shear stress induces a phenotypic shift in smooth muscle cells by downregulating contractile P2X1 receptors and upregulating mitogenic P2Y2 and P2Y6 receptors, potentially promoting vascular remodeling.
High shear may promote remodeling in animal vessels; leaves open human relevance and P2-targeted therapies.
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the role of shear stress in regulating P2 receptors in human umbilical vein. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a novel, computerized, biomechanical perfusion model, parallel vessel segments were randomized to simultaneous perfusion under high (25 dyn/cm2) or low (<4 dyn/cm2) shear stress at identical mean perfusion pressure (20 mm Hg) for 6 hours. In the endothelium, no significant P2 receptor mRNA differences were found. In smooth muscle cells (SMCs), high shear stress decreased P2X1 receptors, whereas P2Y2 and P2Y6 receptors were upregulated. These findings were consistent at the mRNA level (real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction), protein level (Western blot), and morphologically (immunohistochemistry). The changes were more pronounced in the subintimal layer of the media. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that shear stress might regulate gene expression in SMCs more than in the endothelium in intact vessels. Decreased expression of the contractile P2X1 receptor could lead to reduced vascular tonus and increased blood flow. Because P2Y2 and P2Y6 receptors stimulate growth and migration of SMCs, increased expression of these receptors could promote vascular remodeling induced by shear stress. The pattern of upregulation of mitogenic P2Y receptors and downregulation of contractile P2X1 receptor is similar to changes seen in the phenotypic shift from contractile to synthetic SMCs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: