The efficacy of nebivolol on spontaneously hypertensive rats with overactive bladder – an experimental study

Figures

• 

  Figure 1. Cystometric parameters in the study groups. A – Basal pressure changes in different study groups: *WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.05, ^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.05. B – Threshold pressure changes in different study groups: **WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.01, ^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.05. C – Micturition voiding pressure changes in different study groups. D – Voided volume changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. E – Post-void residual changes in different study groups. F – Volume threshold changes in different study groups: **WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.01, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. All results are presented as the means ± SEM (n = 15 rats per group). The obtained data were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. *Significantly different from the WHY group. ^Significantly different from the SHR group. * or ^ – p < 0.05; ** or ^^ – p < 0.01; *** or ^^^ – p < 0.001

• 

  Figure 2. Cystometric parameters in the study groups. A – Voiding efficiency changes in different study groups. B – Intercontraction interval changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.05. C – Bladder contraction duration changes in different study groups. D – Relaxation time changes in different study groups. E – Bladder compliance changes in different study groups: **WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.01, ^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.05. F – Detrusor overactivity index changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. All results are presented as the means ± SEM (n = 15 rats per group). The obtained data were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. *Significantly different from the WHY group. ^Significantly different from the SHR group. * or ^ – p < 0.05; ** or ^^ – p < 0.01; *** or ^^^ – p < 0.001

• 

  Figure 3. Cystometric parameters in the study groups. A – Amplitude of nonvoiding contraction changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. B – Frequency of non-voiding contractions changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. C – Changes of volume threshold to elicit non-voiding contractions in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. All results are presented as the means ± SEM (n = 15 rats per group). The obtained data were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. *Significantly different from the WHY group. ^Significantly different from the SHR group. * or ^ – p < 0.05; ** or ^^ – p < 0.01; *** or ^^^ – p < 0.001

• 

  Figure 4. The measurements of heart rate, mean arterial pressure, urine production, and bladder blood flow parameters in the study groups. A – Heart rate changes in different study groups: *WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.05, ^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.01. B – Mean arterial pressure changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. C – Urine production changes in different study groups. D, E – Bladder blood flow changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.05. All results are presented as the means ± SEM (n = 15 rats per group). The obtained data were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. *Significantly different from the WHY group. ^Significantly different from the SHR group. * or ^ – p < 0.05; ** or ^^ – p < 0.01; *** or ^^^ – p < 0.001

• 

  Figure 5. Biochemical parameters in the study groups. A – Brain-derived neurotrophic factor changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. B – Nerve growth factor changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. C – Interleukin-6 changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.01. D – Tumour necrosis factor α changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.001. E – Interleukin-1β changes in different study groups: ***WHY vs. SHR – p < 0.001, ^^SHR vs. SHR + NEBI – p < 0.01. All results are presented as the means ± SEM (n = 15 rats per group). The obtained data were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s post hoc test. *Significantly different from the WHY group. ^Significantly different from the SHR group. * or ^ – p < 0.05; ** or ^^ – p < 0.01; *** or ^^^ – p < 0.001