| Literature DB >> 26380246 |
Rosa Laura E van Loon1, Beatrijs Bartelds2, Frank A D T G Wagener3, Nada Affara1, Saffloer Mohaupt1, Hans Wijnberg1, Sebastiaan W C Pennings3, Janny Takens2, Rolf M F Berger2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a pulmonary vascular disease with a high mortality, characterized by typical angio-proliferative lesions. Erythropoietin (EPO) attenuates pulmonary vascular remodeling in PAH. We postulated that EPO acts through mobilization of endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) and activation of the cytoprotective enzyme heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1).Entities:
Keywords: aorto-caval shunt; hemodynamics; neointimal lesions; pulmonary hypertension; pulmonary vascular remodeling; right ventricular hypertrophy
Year: 2015 PMID: 26380246 PMCID: PMC4551834 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2015.00071
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1Flow-associated PAH and effects of EPO treatment. Flow-associated PAH and effects of EPO treatment on (A) wall thickness of intra-acinar pulmonary vessels, (B) right ventricular hypertrophy [RV/(LV + IVS)], and (C) systolic pulmonary arterial pressure. (D) Examples of pulmonary histopathology (Verhoeff-staining) of intra-acinar pulmonary vessels. CON, control group, n = 12; PAH, untreated pulmonary arterial hypertension, n = 12–14; PAH + EPO, PAH treated with erythropoietin (EPO), n = 12–15. Differences between the PAH and CON groups were analyzed using t-tests for normally distributed data and Mann–Whitney U testing for not normally distributed data. Differences between the untreated and treated PAH groups (groups 1–4) were tested by one-way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s protected LSD post hoc testing (hematocrit, hemodynamics, RV hypertrophy, pulmonary vascular remodeling). *p < 0.05 vs. CON, #p < 0.05 vs. PAH.
Animal characteristics.
| CON | PAH | PAH + EPO | PAH + EPO + SnMP | PAH + SnMP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean pulmonary artery pressure | 20 ± 1 | 32 ± 1 | 35 ± 1 | 37 ± 3 | 34 ± 2 |
| Systolic pulmonary arterial pressure (mmHg) | 30 ± 1 | 54 ± 3 | 56 ± 3 | 56 ± 4 | 56 ± 6 |
| Mean systemic arterial pressure (mmHg) | 89 ± 2 | 63 ± 4 | 71 ± 6 | 71 ± 5 | 67 ± 4 |
| dP/dT indexed max | 106 ± 8 | 71 ± 2 | 76 ± 6 | 74 ± 7 | 67 ± 6 |
| −dP/dT indexed max | 91 ± 7 | 55 ± 16 | 80 ± 6 | 56 ± 18 | 62 ± 7 |
| Heart rate (beats per minute) | 343 ± 20 | 310 ± 14 | 321 ± 15 | 312 ± 18 | 328 ± 13 |
| Body weight at sacrifice (g) | 390 ± 8 | 350 ± 8 | 346 ± 5 | 343 ± 5 | 343 ± 5 |
| RV hypertrophy, RV/(LV + IVS) | 0.25 ± 0.01 | 0.47 ± 0.03 | 0.47 ± 0.03 | 0.47 ± 0.03 | 0.42 ± 0.04 |
| RV weight (mg) | 0.21 ± 0.02 | 0.44 ± 0.02 | 0.44 ± 0.03 | 0.40 ± 0.03 | 0.38 ± 0.03 |
| Totally muscularized | 2.6 ± 1.2 | 20.3 ± 3.5 | 18.9 ± 2.6 | 24.0 ± 5.6 | 28.8 ± 6.1 |
| Partly muscularized | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 9.4 ± 2.5 | 9.6 ± 2.0 | 17.6 ± 2.6 | 13.1 ± 3.0 |
| Wall thickness (μm) | 7.3 ± 1.3 | 15.6 ± 1.5 | 16.1 ± 1.8 | 15.4 ± 1.9 | 16.6 ± 3.1 |
| Wall/lumen ratio | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.01 | 0.14 ± 0.01 | 0.15 ± 0.02 | 0.24 ± 0.05 |
Data are presented as mean ± SEM. .
*.
.
.
Figure 2Effect of EPO treatment on HO activity and EPCs. (A) Heme oxygenase activity measured in whole lung lysates (methods). (B) Heme oxygenase mRNA expression, relative to 36B4 expression in whole lung. (C) Number of Endothelial Progenitor Cells (EPC) in blood at the day of sacrifice. (D) Example of fluorescence microscope picture of EPCs in blood. CON, control group, n = 4–8; PAH, untreated pulmonary arterial hypertension, n = 8–12; PAH + EPO, PAH treated with erythropoietin (EPO), n = 5–8. Differences between the PAH and CON groups were analyzed using t-tests for normally distributed data and Mann–Whitney U testing for not normally distributed data. Differences between the untreated and treated PAH groups (groups 1–4) were tested by one-way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s protected LSD post hoc testing (hematocrit, hemodynamics, RV hypertrophy, pulmonary vascular remodeling) and Kruskall–Wallis followed by Mann–Whitney post hoc testing with Bonferroni correction (number of EPCs) was used. *p < 0.05 vs. CON, #p < 0.05 vs. PAH.
Figure 3(A) Hematocrit levels throughout the study time points at x-axis in days. Data are mean ± SEM. CON, control group, n = 10; PAH, untreated pulmonary arterial hypertension, n = 12; PAH + EPO, PAH treated with erythropoietin (EPO), n = 14. *p < 0.05 vs. CON, #p < 0.05 vs. PAH PAH + EPO + SnMP, PAH treated with EPO and tin-mesoporphyrin (SnMP), n = 12; PAH + SnMP, PAH treated with SnMP, n = 9. (B) Effects of HO activity blockade on HO activity, number of circulating EPCs and pulmonary vascular remodeling. CON, control group, n = 4–12; PAH, untreated pulmonary arterial hypertension, n = 8–14; PAH + EPO, PAH treated with erythropoietin (EPO), n = 5–15. PAH + EPO + SnMP, PAH treated with EPO and tin-mesoporphyrin (SnMP), n = 5–13; PAH + SnMP, PAH treated with SnMP, n = 6–10. (C) Effects of HO activity blockade gene expression. CON, control group, n = 5; PAH, untreated pulmonary arterial hypertension, n = 6; PAH + EPO, PAH treated with erythropoietin (EPO), n = 6. PAH + EPO + SnMP, PAH treated with EPO and tin-mesoporphyrin (SnMP), n = 6; PAH + SnMP, PAH treated with SnMP, n = 6.VEGF-R2, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2; SDF-1, stromal derived growth factor-1; MCP-1, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1. mRNA expression levels relative to 36B4 mRNA levels. Differences between the PAH and CON groups were analyzed using t-tests for normally distributed data and Mann–Whitney U testing for not normally distributed data. Differences between the untreated and treated PAH groups (groups 1–4) were tested by one-way ANOVA followed by Fisher’s protected LSD post hoc testing (hematocrit, hemodynamics, RV hypertrophy, and pulmonary vascular remodeling) and KruskallâĂŞWallis followed by MannâĂŞWhitney post hoc testing with Bonferroni correction (number of EPCs) was used. #p < 0.05 vs. PAH, †p < 0.05 vs. PAH + EPO, §p < 0.05 vs. PAH + SnMP.