Key result
Transmural pressure in human saphenous veins produces limited depolarization unlinked to pressure versus ring preparations.
Why the study?
Does transmural pressure depolarize myocytes in human saphenous veins?
Does transmural pressure depolarize myocytes in human saphenous veins?
Human saphenous veins do not exhibit pressure-dependent graded depolarization, suggesting mechanical pressure alone is unlikely to cause early vasospasm in vein grafts.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mechanical pressure unlikely to trigger early vein graft spasm; leaves open alternative mechanisms in human grafts.
OBJECTIVE: An increase in transmural pressure reportedly depolarizes myocytes in various arterial blood vessels. We have examined the relationship between transmural pressure and membrane potential (E(m)) in human saphenous veins with a view to determine whether contractile force generation, hence spasmogenesis in vein grafts, involves a similar process of mechanoelectrical excitation. METHODS: Intracellular recordings were made by sharp glass microelectrodes in human isolated saphenous veins and parallel measurements were performed in ring preparations. RESULTS: E(m) values obtained in pressurized vessels at four different pressure levels were (mean+/-SD): -74.4+/-5.5 mV (0-6 cm H(2)O; n=10), -72.6+/-6.5 mV (11-14 cm H(2)O; n=27), -72.1+/-6.5 mV (26-27 cm H(2)O; n=30), and -72.9+/-4.0 mV (50-54 cm H(2)O; n=38), demonstrating the lack of an overt pressure-dependence. Except at the lowest transmural pressure tested, these values were significantly different from E(m) obtained in ring preparations (-77.8+/-4.0 mV; n=30). Raising extracellular K(+) to 80 mM produced a comparable depolarization in tissues either pressurized to 50-54 cm H(2)O (-64.9+/-4.3 mV; n=27) or set up as ring preparations (-64.06+/-6.9 mV; n=35). CONCLUSIONS: Human saphenous veins respond to transmural pressure with a limited depolarization that lacks correlation with pressure. The absence of a pressure-induced graded depolarization suggests that pressure-dependent vasoconstriction does not play a primary role in blood flow regulation in lower limb large veins. Moreover, this raises doubts that mechanical stimuli per se would lead to development of vasospasm in the early stages of saphenous vein grafting into arterial vascular beds.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bieger et al. (2008) studied this question. Transmural pressure vs. Ring preparations was evaluated on Membrane potential (Em). Transmural pressure in human saphenous veins produced a limited depolarization (-72.1 to -74.4 mV) lacking correlation with pressure compared to ring preparations (-77.8 mV).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: