| Literature DB >> 22204383 |
Hong-Mei Ren1, Li-Qun Yang, Zhi-Qiang Liu, Cai-Yang Chen, Chi-Wai Cheung, Kun-Ming Tao, Jian-Gang Song, Wu-Rong Chen, Wei-Feng Yu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Responsiveness of the "jaundiced heart" to propofol is not completely understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of propofol on myocardial performance in rats with obstructive jaundice.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22204383 PMCID: PMC3276443 DOI: 10.1186/1471-230X-11-144
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
In vivo baseline heart rate and cardiac function in the BDL group and sham control group
| HR (bpm) | LVESP (mmHg) | LVEDP (mmHg) | - | ABP (mmHg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SO | 355.5 ± 12.7 | 110.1 ± 4.3 | 3.7 ± 0.4 | 2173.6 ± 82.3 | 1249.7 ± 92.6 | 105 ± 17 |
| BDL | 311.3 ± 16.7* | 127.2 ± 6.4* | 4.5 ± 0.5 | 3288.7 ± 112.3* | 2512.8 ± 132.5* | 109 ± 13 |
(n = 10 in each group)
Values are means ± SEM; n, sample size; SO, sham-operated; BDL, bile duct ligation; HR, heart rate; LVESP, left ventricular end-systolic pressure; LVEDP, left ventricular end-diastolic pressure; ± dP/dtmax , maximal rate for left ventricular pressure rising and declining; ABP, arterial blood pressure.
* P < 0.05 vs sham controls.
Figure 1In vivo effect of propofol on heart rate and indices of cardiac contractility on day 7 in a rat model of obstructive jaundiced and sham-operated controls. (A) Heart rates. (B) Left ventricular end-systolic pressure (LVESP); (C) Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP); (D) Maximal rate for left ventricular pressure rise (+dT/dtmax ). (E) Maximal rate of left ventricular pressure declining (-dP/dtmax ). (F) Arterial blood pressure. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM(n = 10). SO, sham-operated control; BDL, bile duct ligation; HR, heart rate; Abscissa, propofol concentration; ordinate, percent change in a given variable compared with baseline; closed circle, sham-operated rat; open circle, BDL rat. For each twitch parameter, original hemodynamic data from the experimental groups were compared by two-way ANOVA followed by the Bonferroni test. * P < 0.05 vs sham-operated controls (same propofol concentration).
Ex vivo baseline heart rate and cardiac function in the BDL group and the sham control group
| HR (bpm) | LVESP (mmHg) | LVEDP (mmHg) | +dP/dtmax (mmHg s-1) | -dP/dtmax (mmHg s-1) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SO (n = 10) | 254.5 ± 19.5 | 112.5 ± 6.9 | 4.8 ± 0.5 | 1469.2 ± 157.4 | 1117.5 ± 70.0 |
| BDL (n = 10) | 201.3 ± 13.5* | 92.4 ± 5.4* | 7.4 ± 0.3* | 1146.0 ± 64.2* | 954.3 ± 103.7* |
Values are means ± SEM; n, sample size; SO, sham operated; BDL, bile duct ligation; HR, heart rate; LVESP, left ventricular end-systolic pressure; LVEDP, left ventricular end-diastolic pressure; ± dP/dtmax , maximal rate for left ventricular pressure rising and declining.
* P < 0.05 vs sham controls.
Figure 2Effect of propofol on heart rates and indices of cardiac contractility ex vivo (Langendorff preparations) at day 7 in a rat model of obstructive jaundice and sham-operated controls. (A) Heart rates. (B) Maximal rate of left ventricular pressure rise (+dT/dt). (C) Left ventricular end-systolic pressure (LVESP); (D) Left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP). (E) Maximal rate of left ventricular pressure declining (-dP/dtmax ). Results are expressed as means ± SEM (n = 10); SO, sham-operated control; BDL, bile duct ligation; HR, heart rate; Abscissa, propofol concentrations; ordinate, percent change in a given variable compared with baseline; closed circle, sham-operated control; open circle, BDL group. For each twitch parameter, original hemodynamic data from the groups were compared by two-way ANOVA followed by the Bonferroni test. * P < 0.05 vs sham-operated controls (same propofol concentration).