Key result
Ischemic preconditioning increased 31 transcripts in young rats but only 1 in old rats, whereas anesthetic preconditioning induced no detectable gene expression changes in either age group.
The absence of a genomic response to ischemic preconditioning in senescent myocardium may explain the failure of IPC to provide cardioprotective benefits in older animals.
May explain lost IPC benefit in senescence; hypothesis-generating for age-specific cardioprotection trials.
BACKGROUND: Cardiac protection afforded by ischemic preconditioning (IPC) and anesthetic preconditioning (APC) are significantly reduced in the senescent myocardium. The authors hypothesized that age would differentially modulate gene expression induced by IPC and APC in vivo. METHODS: Affymetrix RAT EXON ST 1.0 gene chips (Affymetrix, Santa Clara, CA) were used to explore the transcriptional response to IPC and APC in Fisher 344 male rats (young, 3-5 months, and old, 20-24 months, respectively). Both cohorts, young and old, were divided into three groups: (1) sham control, (2) IPC, and (3) APC. After a total of 90 min, the heart was removed, and the total RNA and protein were extracted. RESULTS: Thirty-one transcripts were increased in the young animals subjected to IPC, particularly transcriptional regulators (Atf3, Egr-1, Btg2, Egr2), cytokines (interleukin 6, CSF1, Myd88), chemokines (Cxcl10, Ccl2, Ccl7), regulators of growth and inflammation (Reg3g, Hamp), remodeling and cell adhesion migration (Cyr61, Tfpi2, Timp1), regulators of apoptosis/cell death (Birc3, Arntl, Hamp, Phlda1), and cell cycle control/DNA repairs (Rrad, Gadd45b, Gadd45g). In contrast, only one transcript increased (Atf3) in the old animals subjected to IPC. No changes in gene expression were found in the young or the old animals subjected to APC. CONCLUSIONS: Early-phase IPC and APC induced different genomic responses. The absence of detectable changes associated with early-phase APC suggests a posttranscriptional or posttranslational mechanism. The absence of a genomic response in the senescent myocardium (except for IPC-induced Atf3) could underlie the failure of IPC to provide any cardiac protective benefit to older animals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2009) studied Cardiac protection / preconditioning. Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) and anesthetic preconditioning (APC) vs. Sham control was evaluated on Transcriptional response (gene expression changes). Ischemic preconditioning increased 31 transcripts in young rats but only 1 in old rats, whereas anesthetic preconditioning induced no detectable gene expression changes in either age group.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: