OBJECTIVE: Growth factor based angiogenesis, with or without cell therapy, is a promising therapeutic modality for patients with coronary artery disease. We compared the relative efficacies of surgically delivered vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) in a swine model of hypercholesterolemia-induced endothelial dysfunction which captures many of the pathophysiologic abnormalities of human coronary disease. METHODS: Yucatan mini-swine (20-30 kg), fed a high cholesterol diet (total 20 weeks), underwent circumflex ameroid placement to create chronic myocardial ischemia, followed three weeks later by perivascular administration of VEGF (2 microg; n=6), FGF-2 (100 microg; n=6), or placebo (n=7) in the ischemic territory. Normocholesterolemic animals (n=7) served as controls. Four weeks later, endothelial function, collateral-dependent perfusion, as well as myocardial protein and mRNA levels of angiogenic mediators were assessed. RESULTS: Endothelial dysfunction was observed in all hypercholesterolemic animals as impaired microvessel relaxation in response to adenosine diphosphate and VEGF. VEGF administration improved baseline-adjusted collateral-dependent perfusion at rest (-0.03+/-0.05 vs -0.12+/-0.04, VEGF vs placebo, p=0.09), but FGF-2 delivery caused a significantly greater improvement in perfusion compared to either group (+0.15+/-0.03, p<0.05 vs HC-placebo and HC-VEGF) at rest. Molecular analysis revealed increased eNOS expression (135%+/-8%, p=0.03 vs placebo) in all growth factor treated animals and increased expression of FGF-2 receptor, FGFR1 (65+/-26%, p=0.04 vs placebo), in FGF-2 treated animals. No significant changes were demonstrated in other angiogenic mediators including Akt, Syndecan-4. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of hypercholesterolemic endothelial dysfunction, FGF-2 is more effective than VEGF at enhancing collateral-dependent perfusion and thus, may be a better candidate than VEGF for angiogenic therapy in patients with end-stage CAD.
OBJECTIVE: Growth factor based angiogenesis, with or without cell therapy, is a promising therapeutic modality for patients with coronary artery disease. We compared the relative efficacies of surgically delivered vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) in a swine model of hypercholesterolemia-induced endothelial dysfunction which captures many of the pathophysiologic abnormalities of humancoronary disease. METHODS: Yucatan mini-swine (20-30 kg), fed a high cholesterol diet (total 20 weeks), underwent circumflex ameroid placement to create chronic myocardial ischemia, followed three weeks later by perivascular administration of VEGF (2 microg; n=6), FGF-2 (100 microg; n=6), or placebo (n=7) in the ischemic territory. Normocholesterolemic animals (n=7) served as controls. Four weeks later, endothelial function, collateral-dependent perfusion, as well as myocardial protein and mRNA levels of angiogenic mediators were assessed. RESULTS: Endothelial dysfunction was observed in all hypercholesterolemic animals as impaired microvessel relaxation in response to adenosine diphosphate and VEGF. VEGF administration improved baseline-adjusted collateral-dependent perfusion at rest (-0.03+/-0.05 vs -0.12+/-0.04, VEGF vs placebo, p=0.09), but FGF-2 delivery caused a significantly greater improvement in perfusion compared to either group (+0.15+/-0.03, p<0.05 vs HC-placebo and HC-VEGF) at rest. Molecular analysis revealed increased eNOS expression (135%+/-8%, p=0.03 vs placebo) in all growth factor treated animals and increased expression of FGF-2 receptor, FGFR1 (65+/-26%, p=0.04 vs placebo), in FGF-2 treated animals. No significant changes were demonstrated in other angiogenic mediators including Akt, Syndecan-4. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of hypercholesterolemic endothelial dysfunction, FGF-2 is more effective than VEGF at enhancing collateral-dependent perfusion and thus, may be a better candidate than VEGF for angiogenic therapy in patients with end-stage CAD.
Authors: M Simons; R O Bonow; N A Chronos; D J Cohen; F J Giordano; H K Hammond; R J Laham; W Li; M Pike; F W Sellke; T J Stegmann; J E Udelson; T K Rosengart Journal: Circulation Date: 2000-09-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Munir Boodhwani; Neel R Sodha; Shigetoshi Mieno; Basel Ramlawi; Shu-Hua Xu; Jun Feng; Richard T Clements; Marc Ruel; Frank W Sellke Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2007-11-05 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Munir Boodhwani; Neel R Sodha; Shigetoshi Mieno; Shu-Hua Xu; Jun Feng; Basel Ramlawi; Richard T Clements; Frank W Sellke Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-09-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Michael P Robich; Robert M Osipov; Louis M Chu; Jun Feng; Thomas A Burgess; Shizu Oyamada; Richard T Clements; Roger J Laham; Frank W Sellke Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2010-08-21 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Louis M Chu; Michael P Robich; Cesario Bianchi; Jun Feng; Yuhong Liu; Shu-Hua Xu; Thomas Burgess; Frank W Sellke Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Michael P Robich; Louis M Chu; Mirnal Chaudray; Reza Nezafat; Yuchi Han; Richard T Clements; Roger J Laham; Warren J Manning; Michael A Coady; Frank W Sellke Journal: Surgery Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Michael P Robich; Louis M Chu; Thomas A Burgess; Jun Feng; Cesario Bianchi; Frank W Sellke Journal: J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 3.105
Authors: Waldemar S Costa; Monica N Ribeiro; Luiz E M Cardoso; Maria C Dornas; Cristiane F Ramos; Carla B M Gallo; Francisco J B Sampaio Journal: World J Urol Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Michael P Robich; Robert M Osipov; Reza Nezafat; Jun Feng; Richard T Clements; Cesario Bianchi; Munir Boodhwani; Michael A Coady; Roger J Laham; Frank W Sellke Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-09-14 Impact factor: 29.690