| Literature DB >> 26878022 |
Vinal Menon1, John F Eberth2, Richard L Goodwin3, Jay D Potts2.
Abstract
Cardiac valve structure and function are primarily determined during early development. Consequently, abnormally-formed heart valves are the most common type of congenital heart defects. Several adult valve diseases can be backtracked to abnormal valve development, making it imperative to completely understand the process and regulation of heart valve development. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) plays an important role in the development of heart valves. Though hemodynamics is vital to valve development, its role in regulating EMT is still unknown. In this study, intracardiac hemodynamics were altered by constricting the outflow tract (OFT)/ventricle junction (OVJ) of HH16-17 (Hamilton and Hamburger (HH) Stage 16-17) chicken embryos, ex ovo for 24 h. The constriction created an increase in peak and time-averaged centerline velocity along the OFT without changes to volumetric flow or heart rate. Computational fluid dynamics was used to estimate the level of increased spatially-averaged wall shear stresses on the OFT cushion from AMIRA reconstructions. OFT constriction led to a significant decrease in OFT cushion volume and the number of invaded mesenchyme in the OFT cushion. qPCR analysis revealed altered mRNA expression of a representative panel of genes, vital to valve development, in the OFT cushions from banded hearts. This study indicates the importance of hemodynamics in valve development.Entities:
Keywords: EMT; cardiac valve development; endocardial cushions; hemodynamics; valvular disease
Year: 2015 PMID: 26878022 PMCID: PMC4751060 DOI: 10.3390/jcdd2020108
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Dev Dis ISSN: 2308-3425
Primers used for qPCR.
| Gene | Forward (F) and Reverse (R) Primers |
|---|---|
| F: 5′-GCTTTGCTTCGGTCTTTGAG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-AACAACTTTCCGATCACCAC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-GCTTCTACCAGACAAACCCG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-CAGGACTGGCCCATAACTGT-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CAGCACCCTGCACTTGAGTA-3′ | |
| R: 5′GCATCCTGTGAGTGCAGAAA-3′ | |
| F: 5′-TACCACTGCAAGAACAGCGT-3′ | |
| R: 5′-TCGGTGACCCCATAGGTGAA-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CAGGTAGTATCGGCTGCTCG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-CCACCAGCCCTGTCATCTTT-3′ | |
| F: 5′-GTATCCCATCAAAGCTCCCA-3′ | |
| R: 5′-CAGCTCCGTATTTAGCTGCC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-GGATGGTATGAGAGGATGTC-3′ | |
| R: 5′GCAAAGAAAGTGAATGAACC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-AGGACACAGCCTCTGCAAGT-3′ | |
| R: 5′-TACTGCCCCTGAGAGCTGAT-3′ | |
| F: 5′-AAGACACTGGACCGAGAGGA-3′ | |
| R: 5′-TTCTGAGGGCGGTTCCAAAG-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CGGCGACTACACCATCAACA-3′ | |
| R: 5′-GTCACTTTGGTGGGGTCGAA-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CTCTTACCGTCGTGGGCATT-3′ | |
| R: 5′-CTGCTTCCCCTGTGTGAGAG-3′ | |
| F: 5′-GAGAAAGCCAACCACAGAGC-3′ | |
| R: 5′-GGTACAGCTCTATCCGCTGC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CACAATGAGTTGGGCATTTG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-GGAACTCTGCTCGAAACAGG-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CACGCTCCTTCCTGGTCAAG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-GGCTGCGGTATGATAGGGAC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-CACCGCTGCTTACATTGTGG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-TGTGATGCCAGGATAGCACC-3′ | |
| F: 5′-TGATGATGACCGCAAGTGGG-3′ | |
| R: 5′-TGTAGATCGGGGCCATGAGA-3′ |
Figure 1Our in vivo (ex ovo) chicken embryonic system. (a) Whole chicken embryo with the outflow tract (OFT) banded, imaged after 24 h; (b) isolated chick embryonic heart, 24 h after OFT banding.
Figure 2Ultrasound imaging. (a) B mode of a banded embryo showing the suture at the ventricle junction (OVJ). Pulsed-wave Doppler (PWD) at the OVJ for the (b) control and (c) banded hearts; (d) OFT banding caused significant changes in the time-averaged (avg) and peak centerline velocities, but not for velocities measured late in the cardiac cycle during retrograde flow measured at the OVJ; (e) the heart rate remained unchanged between controls and banded chick hearts. * p < 0.05.
Figure 33D reconstructed OFT. (a) Representative H&E-stained images of a control (left) and banded OFT (right); (b) cut-away view of a control (left) and banded (right) 3D reconstructed OFT showing cushion (yellow) and myocardium (red). The effect of OFT banding on (c) OFT cushion volume and (d) the number of cells undergoing EMT. V, ventricle; S, position of suture. * p < 0.05.
Figure 4Velocity magnitude streamlines for (top) control chick hearts and (bottom) OFT banded chick hearts at the time-averaged flow velocity, peak flow conditions and late in the cardiac cycle during retrograde flow. V, ventricle; OVJ, OFT/ventricle junction; OFT, outflow tract.
Figure 5Wall shear stress magnitude for (top) control chick hearts and (bottom) OFT banded chick hearts at the time-averaged flow condition, during peak flow conditions and late in the cardiac cycle during retrograde flow. V, ventricle; OVJ, OFT/ventricle junction; OFT, outflow tract.
Figure 6Hemodynamic variables, including (a) the spatially-averaged wall shear stress at the time-averaged flow condition, during peak flow conditions and late in the cardiac cycle during retrograde flow, (b) time-averaged pressure gradient and (c) the volumetric flow rate. * p < 0.05.
Differential expression of genes critical to valve development, upon OFT banding, in OFT tissue of banded and control hearts. * p < 0.05.
| Gene | OFT from Control Hearts | OFT from Banded Hearts | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.00 ± 0.08 | 0.88 ± 0.04 | 0.02 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.24 | 0.83 ± 0.07 | 0.12 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.23 | 0.60 ± 0.06 | 0.01 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.36 | 2.15 ± 0.38 | 0.01 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.20 | 0.80 ± 0.12 | 0.08 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.32 | 0.83 ± 0.12 | 0.19 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.07 | 1.07 ± 0.06 | 0.12 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.12 | 1.28 ± 0.05 | 0.004 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.18 | 0.92 ± 0.10 | 0.25 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.20 | 1.34 ± 0.13 | 0.02 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.47 | 0.72 ± 0.09 | 0.14 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.04 | 0.95 ± 0.05 | 0.10 | |
| 1.00 ± 0.05 | 1.54 ± 0.27 | 0.03 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.12 | 0.77 ± 0.09 | 0.02 * | |
| 1.00 ± 0.23 | 0.97 ± 0.09 | 0.34 | |