Tai Kyoung Lee1, Hyosook Hwang1, Kyung Sook Na1, JeongIl Kwon1, Hwan-Seok Jeong1, Philsun Oh1, Hee Kwon Kim1, Seok Tae Lim1, Myung-Hee Sohn1, Hwan-Jeong Jeong2, Chang-Moon Lee3. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine, Cyclotron Research Center, Institute for Medical Sciences, Molecular Imaging & Therapeutic Medicine Research Center, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, Jeonju, South Korea. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine, Cyclotron Research Center, Institute for Medical Sciences, Molecular Imaging & Therapeutic Medicine Research Center, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, Jeonju, South Korea ; Department of Nuclear Medicine, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, 634-18, Geumam-dong, Dukjin-gu, Jeonju, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Chonnam National University, Yeosu, South Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Angiogenesis plays a major role in various physiological and pathological situations. Thus, an angiogenic therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been commonly recommended as a representative therapeutic solution to recover the insufficient blood supply of collateral vessels in an ischemic lesion. In this study, the injection method and injection time point of VEGF proteins were focused to discover how to enhance the angiogenic effect with VEGF. METHODS: Mouse models (n = 15) were divided into control, VEGF treatment by intra-venous injection (VEGF-IV) and VEGF treatment by intra-muscular injection (VEGF-IM). Right proximal femoral arteries of mice were firmly sutured to obstruct arterial blood-flow. In the VEGF-IV treatment group, VEGF proteins were injected into the tail vein and, in the VEGF-IM treatment group, VEGF proteins were directly injected into the ischemic site of the right thigh after postoperative day 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 follow-ups. Blood-flow images were acquired by (99m)Tc Gamma Image Acquisition System to compare the ischemic-to-non-ischemic bloodstream ratio at postoperative days 5, 15, and 30. RESULTS: VEGF-IM treatment significantly induced higher an angiogenic effect rather than both the control group (P = 0.008) and VEGF-IV treatment group (P = 0.039) at the 30th day. CONCLUSION: During all experiments, angiogenesis of VEGF-IM treatment represented the most evident effect compared with control and VEGF-IV group in a mouse model of hindlimb ischemia.
PURPOSE: Angiogenesis plays a major role in various physiological and pathological situations. Thus, an angiogenic therapy with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) has been commonly recommended as a representative therapeutic solution to recover the insufficient blood supply of collateral vessels in an ischemic lesion. In this study, the injection method and injection time point of VEGF proteins were focused to discover how to enhance the angiogenic effect with VEGF. METHODS:Mouse models (n = 15) were divided into control, VEGF treatment by intra-venous injection (VEGF-IV) and VEGF treatment by intra-muscular injection (VEGF-IM). Right proximal femoral arteries of mice were firmly sutured to obstruct arterial blood-flow. In the VEGF-IV treatment group, VEGF proteins were injected into the tail vein and, in the VEGF-IM treatment group, VEGF proteins were directly injected into the ischemic site of the right thigh after postoperative day 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 follow-ups. Blood-flow images were acquired by (99m)Tc Gamma Image Acquisition System to compare the ischemic-to-non-ischemic bloodstream ratio at postoperative days 5, 15, and 30. RESULTS:VEGF-IM treatment significantly induced higher an angiogenic effect rather than both the control group (P = 0.008) and VEGF-IV treatment group (P = 0.039) at the 30th day. CONCLUSION: During all experiments, angiogenesis of VEGF-IM treatment represented the most evident effect compared with control and VEGF-IV group in a mouse model of hindlimb ischemia.
Authors: Beverly L Falcon; Sharon Barr; Prafulla C Gokhale; Jeyling Chou; Jennifer Fogarty; Philippe Depeille; Mark Miglarese; David M Epstein; Donald M McDonald Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: H J Baelde; M Eikmans; D W P Lappin; P P Doran; D Hohenadel; P-T Brinkkoetter; F J van der Woude; R Waldherr; T J Rabelink; E de Heer; J A Bruijn Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2007-01-31 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Ann Hoeben; Bart Landuyt; Martin S Highley; Hans Wildiers; Allan T Van Oosterom; Ernst A De Bruijn Journal: Pharmacol Rev Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 25.468
Authors: Federico Biscetti; Giuseppe Straface; Vincenzo Arena; Egidio Stigliano; Giovanni Pecorini; Paola Rizzo; Giulia De Angelis; Luigi Iuliano; Giovanni Ghirlanda; Andrea Flex Journal: Cardiovasc Diabetol Date: 2009-09-08 Impact factor: 9.951
Authors: Marta Rojas-Torres; Ismael Sánchez-Gomar; Antonio Rosal-Vela; Lucía Beltrán-Camacho; Sara Eslava-Alcón; José Ángel Alonso-Piñeiro; Javier Martín-Ramírez; Rafael Moreno-Luna; Mª Carmen Durán-Ruiz Journal: Stem Cell Res Ther Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 8.079
Authors: Christopher G England; Hyung-Jun Im; Liangzhu Feng; Feng Chen; Stephen A Graves; Reinier Hernandez; Hakan Orbay; Cheng Xu; Steve Y Cho; Robert J Nickles; Zhuang Liu; Dong Soo Lee; Weibo Cai Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2016-05-21 Impact factor: 12.479