Efectos del danazol y hemisuccinato de danazol sobre la presión de perfusión y resistencia vascular / Effects of danazol and danazol hemisuccinate on perfusión pressure and vascular resistance

Estudios clínicos y epidemiológicos sugieren que el danazol ha sido considerado como un factor de riesgo para desarrollar hipertensión. Para proporcionar información adicional acerca de este fenómeno, en este trabajo fue caracterizado el efecto inducido por el danazol y el hemisuccinato de danazol sobre la presión de perfusión y la resistencia vascular en corazón aislado de rata a flujo constante (modelo de Langendorff). Los resultados, mostraron que; 1) el hemisuccinato de danazol [10-9 M] incrementa la presión de perfusión en comparación con el danazol [10-9 M]; 2) los efectos del derivado de danazol [10-9 M - 10-4 M] sobre la presión de perfusión fueron inhibidos por flutamida [10-6 M]; 3) la nifedipina [10-6 M], bloqueó los efectos ejercidos por el hemisuccinato de danazol [10-9 M -10-4 M] sobre la presión de perfusión y 4) el efecto del derivado de danazol [10-9 M - 10-4 M] sobre la presión de perfusión en presencia del montelukast [10-6 M] fue inhibido significativamente (p=0,008). En conclusión, los efectos inducidos por el danazol y hemisuccinato de danazol sobre la presión de perfusión y la resistencia vascular podrían depender de su estructura química. Este fenómeno podría involucrar la interacción del receptor de andrógenos e indirectamente la activación de la síntesis de leucotrienos D4 (LTD4) y consecuentemente inducir variaciones en la presión de perfusión.

Epidemiological and clinical studies suggest that danazol has been considered a risk factor for hypertension development. In order to provide additional information about this phenomenon, the effect induced by both danazol and hemisuccinate of danazol on perfusion pressure and vascular resistance was characterized in isolated rat heart at constant flow (Langendorff model) and it was evaluated in this work.The results showed that; 1) hemisuccinate of danazol [10-9 M] increases perfusion pressure and vascular resistance in comparison with danazol [10-9 M]; 2) the effects of danazol-derivative [10-9 M - 10-4 M] on perfusion pressure were inhibited by flutamide [10-6 M]; 3) nifedipine [10-6 M] blockaded the effects exerted by hemisuccinate of danazol [10-9 M -10-4 M] on perfusion pressure; and 4) the effect of danazol-derivative [10-9 M - 10-4 M] on perfusion pressure in presence of montelukast [10-6 M] was significantly inhibited (p=0.008). In conclusion, the effects induced by both danazol and hemisuccinate of danazol on perfusion pressure and vascular resistance could depend on their chemical structure. This phenomenon could involve the interaction of androgene steroid-receptor and indirect activation of leukotriene D4 (LTD4) synthesis and consequently, induce variations in the perfusion pressure.

The Comparison of Protective Effects of Adenosine Included Cardioplegia According to Adenosine Dosage / 대한흉부외과학회지

BACKGROUND: Adenosine is secreted by myocardial cells during myocardial ischemia or hypoxia. It has many beneficial effects on arrhythmias, myocardial ischemia, and reperfusion ischemia. Although many investigators have demonstrated that cardioplegia that includes adenosine shows protective effects in myocardial ischemia or reperfusion injury, reports of the optimal dose of adenosine in cardioplegic solutions vary. We reported the results of beneficial effects of single dosage (0.75 mg/Kg/min) adenosine by use of self-made Langendorff system. But it is uncertain that dosage was optimal. The objective of this study is to determine the optimal dose of adenosine in cardioplegic solutions. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We used a self-made Langendorff system to evaluate the myocardial protective effect. Isolated rat hearts were subjected to 90 minutes of deep hypothermic arrest (15degree C) with modified St. Thomas' Hospital cardioplegia including adenosine. Myocardial adenosine levels were augmented during ischemia by providing exogenous adenosine in the cardioplegia. Three groups of hearts were studied: (1) group 1 (n=10) : adenosine -0.5 mg/Kg/min, (2) group 2 (n=10): adenosine -0.75 mg/Kg/min, (3) group 3 (n=10) : adenosine -1 mg/Kg/min. RESULT: Group 3 resulted in a significantly rapid arrest time of the heart beat (p<0.05) but significantly slow recovery time of the heart beat after reperfusion (p<0.05) compared to groups 1 and 2. Group 2 showed a better percentage of recovery (p<0.05) in systolic aortic pressure, aortic overflow volume, coronary flow volume, and cardiac output compared to groups 1 and 3. Group 1 showed a a better percentage of recovery (p<0.05) in the heart rate compared to the others. In biochemical study of drained reperfusates, CPK and lactic acid levels did not show significant differences in all of the groups. CONCLUSION: We concluded that group 2 [adenosine (0.75 mg/Kg/min) added to cardioplegia] has better recovery effects after reperfusion in myocardial ischemia and is the most appropriate dosage compared to group 1 and 3.