BACKGROUND: Rosiglitazone has been the focus of extensive discussion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of rosiglitazone on iliac arteries, both at the injury site and the contralateral artery, of hypercholesterolemic rabbits undergoing balloon catheter injury. METHODS: White male rabbits were fed a hypercholesterolemic diet by oral gavage for 6 weeks and divided into two groups as follows: rosiglitazone group (14 rabbits treated with rosiglitazone during 6 weeks) and the control group (18 rabbits without rosiglitazone). Animals underwent balloon catheter injury of the right iliac artery on the 14th day. RESULTS: In the contralateral iliac artery, there was no significant difference in the intima/media layer area ratio (IMR) between the control and rosiglitazone groups. Rosiglitazone did not reduce the probability of type I, II, or III lesions (72.73% vs 92.31%; p=0.30) and type IV or V lesions (27.27% vs 7.69%; p=0.30). As for the homolateral iliac artery, the intimal area was significantly lower in the rosiglitazone group, as compared to the control group (p = 0.024). The luminal layer area was higher in the rosiglitazone group vs. the control group (p < 0.0001). There was a significant reduction of 65% in the IMR in the rosiglitazone group vs the control group (p = 0.021). None of the histological criteria for type I-V atherosclerotic lesions (American Heart Association) were found in the homolateral iliac artery. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that rosiglitazone given for 6 weeks prevents atherogenesis at the injury site, but not in a vessel distant from the injury site.
BACKGROUND:Rosiglitazone has been the focus of extensive discussion. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of rosiglitazone on iliac arteries, both at the injury site and the contralateral artery, of hypercholesterolemic rabbits undergoing balloon catheter injury. METHODS: White male rabbits were fed a hypercholesterolemic diet by oral gavage for 6 weeks and divided into two groups as follows: rosiglitazone group (14 rabbits treated with rosiglitazone during 6 weeks) and the control group (18 rabbits without rosiglitazone). Animals underwent balloon catheter injury of the right iliac artery on the 14th day. RESULTS: In the contralateral iliac artery, there was no significant difference in the intima/media layer area ratio (IMR) between the control and rosiglitazone groups. Rosiglitazone did not reduce the probability of type I, II, or III lesions (72.73% vs 92.31%; p=0.30) and type IV or V lesions (27.27% vs 7.69%; p=0.30). As for the homolateral iliac artery, the intimal area was significantly lower in the rosiglitazone group, as compared to the control group (p = 0.024). The luminal layer area was higher in the rosiglitazone group vs. the control group (p < 0.0001). There was a significant reduction of 65% in the IMR in the rosiglitazone group vs the control group (p = 0.021). None of the histological criteria for type I-V atherosclerotic lesions (American Heart Association) were found in the homolateral iliac artery. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that rosiglitazone given for 6 weeks prevents atherogenesis at the injury site, but not in a vessel distant from the injury site.