| Literature DB >> 23990872 |
Peter Nordbeck1, Leoni Bönhof, Karl-Heinz Hiller, Sabine Voll, Paula Arias-Loza, Lea Seidlmayer, Tatjana Williams, Yu-Xiang Ye, Daniel Gensler, Theo Pelzer, Georg Ertl, Peter M Jakob, Wolfgang R Bauer, Oliver Ritter.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Surgical procedures in small animal models of heart disease might evoke alterations in cardiac morphology and function. The aim of this study was to reveal and quantify such potential artificial early or long term effects in vivo, which might account for a significant bias in basic cardiovascular research, and, therefore, could potentially question the meaning of respective studies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23990872 PMCID: PMC3749142 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Sham surgery situs and survey arrangement.
MRI was performed 1 and 8 weeks after sham surgery.
Figure 2Representative full cycle of a cardiac short-axis cine-MRI with 20 frames.
Figure 3Illustration of left and right ventricular volumetry and determination of wall thickness and systolic function.
Figure 4Body weight at baseline, 1 week and 8 weeks after sham surgery in both groups (mean ± SD).
* indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Figure 5Left and right ventricular myocardial mass and myocardial mass index 1 week and 8 weeks after sham surgery (mean ± SD).
* indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Figure 6Left and right ventricular enddiastolic volume and enddiastolic volume index normalized to body weight 1 week and 8 weeks after sham surgery (mean ± SD).
* indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Figure 7Left and right ventricular cardiac output and cardiac index normalized to body weight 1 week and 8 weeks after sham surgery (mean ± SD).
* indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Results overview, left ventricle.
| LV | Sham 1 week 1, | ± SD n = 6 | Control 1 week 1, | ± SD n = 6 | Sham 8 week 8, | ± SD n = 6 | Control 8 week 8, | ± SD n = 6 |
| Body mass (g) |
| 10.6 |
| 11.3 |
| 21.1 |
| 33.4 |
| HR (1/min) |
| 27 |
| 26 |
| 30 |
| 29 |
| LVM (mg) |
| 60.7 |
| 73.5 |
| 57.2 |
| 84.8 |
| EDWT (mm) |
| 0.54 |
| 0.14 |
| 0.06 |
| 0.17 |
| ESWT (mm) |
| 0.62 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.32 |
| EDV (µl) |
| 96.6 |
| 69.2 |
| 46.7 |
| 65.3 |
| ESV (µl) |
| 22.7 |
| 20.3 |
| 42.9 |
| 31.7 |
| SWT (mm) |
| 0.21 |
| 0.12 |
| 0.19 |
| 0.18 |
| SWT (%) |
| 19 |
| 6 |
| 9 |
| 7 |
| SV (µl) |
| 99.2 |
| 50.8 |
| 63.4 |
| 72.6 |
| CO (ml/min) |
| 28.7 |
| 17.5 |
| 22.2 |
| 28.7 |
| EF (%) |
| 4 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 3 |
| LVM/EDV (g/ml) |
| 0.49 |
| 0.15 |
| 0.41 |
| 0.44 |
| LVMI (mg/g) |
| 0.30 |
| 0.22 |
| 0.24 |
| 0.32 |
| EDVI (µl/g) |
| 0.36 |
| 0.20 |
| 0.18 |
| 0.23 |
| ESVI (µl/g) |
| 0.09 |
| 0.06 |
| 0.14 |
| 0.90 |
| SVI (µl/g) |
| 0.37 |
| 0.15 |
| 0.21 |
| 0.23 |
| CI (ml/min/g) |
| 0.11 |
| 0.05 |
| 0.07 |
| 0.09 |
All results are given as mean±SD. LV: left ventricle, HR: heart rate, LVM: left ventricular myocardial mass, EDWT: enddiastolic wall thickness, ESWT: endsystolic wall thickness, EDV: enddiastolic volume, ESV: endsystolic volume, SWT: systolic wall thickening, SV: stroke volume, CO: cardiac output, EF: ejection fraction, and (C)I: (cardiac) index (per gram body weight).
indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Results overview, right ventricle.
| RV | Sham 1 week 1, | ± SD n = 6 | Control 1 week 1, | ± SD n = 6 | Sham 8 week 8, | ± SD n = 6 | Control 8 week 8, | ± SD n = 6 |
| Body mass (g) |
| 10,6 |
| 11,3 |
| 21.1 |
| 33.4 |
| HR (1/min) |
| 27 |
| 26 |
| 30 |
| 29 |
| RVM (mg) |
| 36.6 |
| 29.0 |
| 33.2 |
| 48.5 |
| EDWT (mm) |
| 0.28 |
| 0.07 |
| 0.04 |
| 0.06 |
| ESWT (mm) |
| 0.52 |
| 0.16 |
| 0.17 |
| 0.19 |
| EDV (µl) |
| 82.0 |
| 56.9 |
| 98.7 |
| 81.2 |
| ESV (µl) |
| 17.9 |
| 16.5 |
| 36.6 |
| 44.5 |
| SWT (mm) |
| 0.29 |
| 0.12 |
| 0.14 |
| 0.16 |
| SWT (%) |
| 20 |
| 12 |
| 12 |
| 17 |
| SV (µl) |
| 68.3 |
| 46.6 |
| 105.0 |
| 92.6 |
| CO (ml/min) |
| 21.8 |
| 15.7 |
| 33.4 |
| 34.4 |
| EF (%) |
| 4 |
| 3 |
| 8 |
| 7 |
| RVM/EDV (g/ml) |
| 0.20 |
| 0.07 |
| 0.42 |
| 0.36 |
| RVMI (mg/g) |
| 0.13 |
| 0.07 |
| 0.12 |
| 0.16 |
| EDVI (µl/g) |
| 0.31 |
| 0.17 |
| 0.32 |
| 0.26 |
| ESVI (µl/g) |
| 0.14 |
| 0.05 |
| 0.12 |
| 0.13 |
| SVI (µl/g) |
| 0.24 |
| 0.13 |
| 0.34 |
| 0.27 |
| CI (ml/min/g) |
| 0.06 |
| 0.05 |
| 0.11 |
| 0.10 |
All results are given as mean±SD. RV: right ventricle, HR: heart rate, RVM: right ventricular myocardial mass, EDWT: enddiastolic wall thickness, ESWT: endsystolic wall thickness, EDV: enddiastolic volume, ESV: endsystolic volume, SWT: systolic wall thickening, SV: stroke volume, CO: cardiac output, EF: ejection fraction, and (C)I: (cardiac) index (per gram body weight).
indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the respective groups.
Figure 8Time course of various metabolic blood parameters (glucose, urea, triglycerides, and leptin) after sham surgery.