Article Text

PDF

251 THE ROLE OF NITRIC OXIDE AND CALCIUM REGULATION IN CARDIOPROTECTION FROM REMOTE ISCHAEMIC PRECONDITIONING
  1. C Thaitirarot,
  2. H Crumbie,
  3. G Rodrigo
  1. University of Leicester

    Abstract

    We have previously shown that ischaemic preconditioning (IPC) of the whole heart protects the isolated ventricular myocytes against Ca2+-overload injury during simulated ischaemia [1]. Nitric oxide (NO) signalling is known to modulate Ca2+-regulation in cardiac myocytes [2] and plays a central role in IPC [3]. We have compared the involvement NO-signalling in cardioprotection in IPC versus remote ischaemic preconditioning (rIPC).

    We used an isolated ventricular myocyte model of IPC of whole hearts [1] and compared this to rIPC myocytes, where naïve cardiomyocytes are remotely conditioned with the superfusate from preconditioned hearts. Two models of ischaemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury were used to determine protection. 1) Ischaemia was simulated in myocytes centrifuged to a dense pellet and layered with mineral oil to prevent gaseous diffusion (37° C, 30 min), and reperfusion by dispersing the myocyte pellet into oxygenated 2mM Ca2+ Tyrode [1] and cell death was assessed by Calcein and Propidium Iodide staining. 2) [Ca2+]i was recorded from field-stimulated myocytes loaded with Fura-2 and subjected to metabolic inhibition (2 mM NaCN and 1 mM Iodoacetic acid) for 8 min followed by re-energization with 2mM Ca2 Tyrode for 12 min. Cell injury was determined as the inability to maintain low diastolic [Ca2+]i and to contract in response to electrical stimulation. Data are mean±S.E.M (n=number of experiments, hearts; one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison post-hoc test).

    IPC and rIPC both significantly reduced the degree of necrotic injury compared to control myocytes [IPC 29.7±2.1% (n=32, 6; P<0.001); rIPC 30.9±3.7% (n=17, 12; P<0.001); control 55.1±2.9% (n=18, 13)]. The protective effect of rIPC was abolished by the non-specific NOS inhibitor L-NAME (100 µM) at 56.5±3.8% (n=13, 10; P<0.001), when present during the rIPC stimulus and the I/R protocol. Both IPC and rIPC increased the percentage of myocytes that recovered contractile function on re-energization following metabolic inhibition, from 39.8±3.7% of control myocytes (n=30, 12), to 63.8±2.3% (n=24, 7; P<0.001) and 55.7±3.2% (n=24, 9; P<0.01) respectively. This increased recovery of contractile function was not blocked by L-NAME present during the rIPC stimulus. However, only IPC increased the percentage of cells able to maintain a low diastolic [Ca2+]i (fura-2 ratio<1) following re-energization, from 19.4±3.2% of control myocytes (n=30, 14) to 48.3±3.8% of IPC myocytes (n=24, 7; P<0.001) and 24.9±4.5% of rIPC myocytes (n=23, 9; ns).

    Our data show that the protection against necrotic cell death of rIPC involves NOS-signalling, whereas, the improved recovery of contractile function was NOS-independent. Further, rIPC was not associated with maintained Ca2+-regulation, as seen in true IPC.

    Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.