BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial superoxide radical (O(2)(•¯)) production increases after cardiac ischemia/reperfusion (IR). Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) preserves mitochondrial function and attenuates O(2)(•¯) production, but the mechanism is unknown. Mitochondrial membrane potential (mΔΨ) is known to affect O(2)(•¯) production; mitochondrial depolarization decreases O(2)(•¯) formation. We examined the relationship between O(2)(•¯) production and mΔΨ during IR and IPC. MATERIALS/ METHODS: Rat hearts were subjected to Control or IPC. Mitochondria were isolated at end equilibration (End EQ), end ischemia (End I), and end reperfusion (End RP). mΔΨ was measured using a tetraphenylphosphonium electrode. Mitochondrial O(2)(•¯) production was measured by electron paramagnetic resonance using DMPO spin trap. Cytochrome c levels were measured using high-pressure liquid chromatography. RESULTS: IPC preserved mΔΨ at End I (-156 ± 5 versus -131 ± 6 mV, P < 0.001) and End RP (-168 ± 2 versus -155 ± 2 mV, P < 0.05). At End RP, IPC attenuated O(2)(•¯) production (2527 ± 221 versus 3523 ± 250 AU/mg protein, P < 0.05). IPC preserved cytochrome c levels (351 ± 14 versus 269 ± 16 picomoles/mg protein, P < 0.05) at End RP, and decreased mitochondrial cristae disruption (10% ± 4% versus 33% ± 7%, P < 0.05) and amorphous density formation (18% ± 4% versus 28% ± 1%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We conclude that IPC preserves mΔΨ, possibly by limiting disruption of mitochondrial inner membrane. IPC also decreases mitochondrial O(2)(•¯) production and preserves mitochondrial ultrastructure after IR. While it was previously held that slight decreases in mΔΨ decrease O(2)(•¯) production, our results indicate that preservation of mΔΨ is associated with decreased O(2)(•¯) and preservation of cardiac function in IPC. These findings indicate that the mechanism of IPC may not involve mΔΨ depolarization, but rather preservation of mitochondrial electrochemical potential.
BACKGROUND: Mitochondrial superoxide radical (O(2)(•¯)) production increases after cardiac ischemia/reperfusion (IR). Ischemic preconditioning (IPC) preserves mitochondrial function and attenuates O(2)(•¯) production, but the mechanism is unknown. Mitochondrial membrane potential (mΔΨ) is known to affect O(2)(•¯) production; mitochondrial depolarization decreases O(2)(•¯) formation. We examined the relationship between O(2)(•¯) production and mΔΨ during IR and IPC. MATERIALS/ METHODS:Rat hearts were subjected to Control or IPC. Mitochondria were isolated at end equilibration (End EQ), end ischemia (End I), and end reperfusion (End RP). mΔΨ was measured using a tetraphenylphosphonium electrode. Mitochondrial O(2)(•¯) production was measured by electron paramagnetic resonance using DMPO spin trap. Cytochrome c levels were measured using high-pressure liquid chromatography. RESULTS: IPC preserved mΔΨ at End I (-156 ± 5 versus -131 ± 6 mV, P < 0.001) and End RP (-168 ± 2 versus -155 ± 2 mV, P < 0.05). At End RP, IPC attenuated O(2)(•¯) production (2527 ± 221 versus 3523 ± 250 AU/mg protein, P < 0.05). IPC preserved cytochrome c levels (351 ± 14 versus 269 ± 16 picomoles/mg protein, P < 0.05) at End RP, and decreased mitochondrial cristae disruption (10% ± 4% versus 33% ± 7%, P < 0.05) and amorphous density formation (18% ± 4% versus 28% ± 1%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: We conclude that IPC preserves mΔΨ, possibly by limiting disruption of mitochondrial inner membrane. IPC also decreases mitochondrial O(2)(•¯) production and preserves mitochondrial ultrastructure after IR. While it was previously held that slight decreases in mΔΨ decrease O(2)(•¯) production, our results indicate that preservation of mΔΨ is associated with decreased O(2)(•¯) and preservation of cardiac function in IPC. These findings indicate that the mechanism of IPC may not involve mΔΨ depolarization, but rather preservation of mitochondrial electrochemical potential.
Authors: J L Zweier; P Kuppusamy; R Williams; B K Rayburn; D Smith; M L Weisfeldt; J T Flaherty Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 1989-11-15 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: G Ambrosio; J L Zweier; C Duilio; P Kuppusamy; G Santoro; P P Elia; I Tritto; P Cirillo; M Condorelli; M Chiariello Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 1993-09-05 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Jacqueline M Garonzik-Wang; Bonnie E Lonze; Jessica M Ruck; Xun Luo; Allan B Massie; Keith Melancon; James F Burdick; Dorry L Segev; Zhaoli Sun Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Christopher G Scheitlin; Devi M Nair; Juan A Crestanello; Jay L Zweier; B Rita Alevriadou Journal: Cell Mol Bioeng Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 2.321
Authors: Kimberly N Grelli; Amy M Palubinsky; A Cozette Kale; Britney N Lizama-Manibusan; Jeannette N Stankowski; Ginger L Milne; Robert Singer; Bethann McLaughlin Journal: CNS Neurol Disord Drug Targets Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 4.388