| Literature DB >> 26436072 |
Siyavash Joukar1, Vahid Sheibani2, Faramarz Koushesh3, Elham Ghasemipoor Afshar4, Soodabe Ghorbani Shahrbabaki5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is the controversy concerning the main component of tobacco, which is responsible for its arrhythmogenesis. In addition, there is the lack of adequate information about the influence of combination of black tea and nicotine on heart rhythm.Entities:
Keywords: Ventricular Arrhythmia, Black Tea, Nicotine
Year: 2015 PMID: 26436072 PMCID: PMC4588709 DOI: 10.5812/cardiovascmed.27088v2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Res Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2251-9572
Weight Changes, Blood Pressure, Heart Rate, RR, PR, QRS, and JT Intervals in Electrocardiogram of the Animal Groups [a,b]
| Group | n | WT Changes, % | SBP, mm Hg | DBP, mm Hg | MAP, mm Hg | HR, beat/min | RR, ms | PR, ms | QRS, ms | JT, ms |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 7 | 17 ± 2.4 | 120 ± 13.1 | 100 ± 10.9 | 106 ± 11 | 412 ± 21.4 | 146 ± 7.5 | 44 ± 3.9 | 19 ± 3.6 | 33 ± 8.4 |
|
| 8 | 6.7 ± 3.9 [ | 118 ± 17.7 | 97 ± 18.2 | 104 ± 17.8 | 376 ± 36.1 | 161 ± 16.1 | 44 ± 2.39 | 17.1 ± 1.83 | 39.4 ± 6.9 [ |
|
| 7 | 1 ± 4.3 [ | 140 ± 17.5 | 115 ± 14.3 | 124 ± 14.8 | 381 ± 26.46 | 157 ± 10.63 | 44.7 ± 3.44 | 18.4 ± 2.27 | 45.4 ± 3.3 [ |
|
| 7 | -10 ± 4.2 [ | 135 ± 28.4 | 108 ± 24.2 | 117 ± 25.5 | 386 ± 29.5 | 155 ± 12.7 | 44.2 ± 3.6 | 17.9 ± 1.7 | 47.4 ± 6.8 [ |
|
| 0.000 | 0.074 | 0.144 | 0.109 | 0.153 | 0.171 | 0.960 | 0.605 | 0.001 |
a Abbreviations: CTL, control group; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HR, heart rate; MAP, mean arterial pressure; N, nicotine group; n, frequency of animals in each group; SBP, systolic blood pressure; T, black tea group; T + N, black tea plus nicotine group; WT, weight.
b Values are presented as mean ± SD.
c P < 0.001 versus control group.
d P < 0.05 versus control group.
e P < 0.001 versus control group.
f P < 0.05 versus Tea group.
g P < 0.01 versus control group.
h P < 0.001 versus other groups.
Figure 1.Basal QT Interval and QT as Bazett’s Formula Normalized (QTcn) in Each Animal Groups
Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 7 to 8 for each group); *, P < 0.05 versus tea group; †, P < 0.01 versus control group; ‡; P < 0.001 versus control group; •, P < 0.01 versus tea group; #, P < 0.01 versus control and tea groups. Control, control group; T, black tea group; N, nicotine group; N + T, nicotine + black tea group.
Figure 2.The Effects of Four-Week Pretreatment of Nicotine and Black Tea on Number (A and B), Duration (C) and Score (D) of Ventricular Arrhythmia in Animal Groups
Data are presented as mean ± SD, (n, 7 to 8 for each group); •, P < 0.001 versus CTL group, ₀; P < 0.05 versus control group; *, P < 0.05 versus tea group; **, P < 0.01 versus CTL group; CTL, control group; T, black tea group; N, nicotine group; N + T, nicotine + black tea group.
Figure 3.The Effects of Four-Week Pretreatment of Nicotine and Black Tea on Latency, Times From the Onset of Aconitine Infusion to the first VT and VF (A), and Threshold Dose of Aconitine for Induction of VT and VF (B)
Data are presented as mean ± SD, (n, 7 to 8 for each group); •, P < 0.001 versus control group; *, P < 0.05 versus control group; **, P < 0.01 versus control group; Control, control group; T, black tea group; N, nicotine group; N + T, nicotine + black tea group.
Total Antioxidant Capacity, Malondialdehyde, and Total Antioxidant Capacity to Malondialdehyde Ratio of Heart Tissue in Different Groups [a,b]
| Group | n | TAC, µmol/mg protein | MDA, nmol/mg protein | TAC/MDA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 7 | 0.029 ± 0.002 | 0.122 ± 0.026 | 247 ± 56 |
|
| 8 | 0.083 ± 0.04 [ | 0.156 ± 0.037 | 590 ± 353 [ |
|
| 7 | 0.057 ± 0.029 | 0.194 ± 0.048 [ | 322 ± 176 |
|
| 7 | 0.050 ± 0.014 | 0.193 ± 0.025 [ | 246 ± 66 [ |
|
| 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
a Abbreviations: TAC, total antioxidant capacity; MDA, malondialdehyde; CTL, control group; T, black tea group; N, nicotine group; T + N, black tea plus nicotine group.
b Data are presented as mean ± SD.
c P = 0.003.
d P = 0.029.
e P = 0.007.
f P = 0.008, all compared with control group.
g P = 0.029 versus T group. n = animal number.