Key result
Acetylcholine infusion in human dorsal hand veins produced an endothelium-dependent biphasic response, with low doses causing venodilatation and higher doses causing venoconstriction.
Why the study?
Does the dose-response to acetylcholine in human veins depend on the presence of the endothelium?
Population
Healthy volunteers (dorsal hand veins)
Comparison
Local infusions of acetylcholine after removal… vs Same veins before removal of the endothelium
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
May limit acetylcholine as a simple endothelial marker in veins; hypothesis-generating for biphasic in vivo responses.
Does the dose-response to acetylcholine in human veins depend on the presence of the endothelium?
Acetylcholine produces an endothelium-dependent biphasic dose-response in human veins in vivo, raising questions about its use as a simple marker of endothelial function.
Collier et al. (1990) studied Healthy volunteers. Acetylcholine infusion vs. Endothelium-intact vessel (before irrigation) was evaluated on Dose-response to acetylcholine (venodilatation and venoconstriction). Acetylcholine infusion in human dorsal hand veins produced an endothelium-dependent biphasic response, with low doses causing venodilatation and higher doses causing venoconstriction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: