Friederike Behmenburg1, André Heinen2, Lilli Vom Bruch1, Markus W Hollmann3, Ragnar Huhn4. 1. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf Moorenstr, Duesseldorf, Germany. 2. Institute of Cardiovascular Physiology, Heinrich-Heine University Duesseldorf, Duesseldorf, Germany. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 4. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Duesseldorf Moorenstr, Duesseldorf, Germany. Electronic address: Ragnar.Huhn@med.uni-duesseldorf.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In animal studies, remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a powerful tool to protect the heart from ischemia and reperfusion injury. Unfortunately, this effect was not seen consistently in recent large clinical trials. Aging was shown to be a confounding factor for the effect of direct preconditioning in experimental studies, but whether aging also can influence the effect of RIPC and thus be responsible for the contradictory clinical effect is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the cardioprotective effect of RIPC was abolished by aging. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, blinded laboratory investigation. SETTING: Experimental laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Male Wistar rats. INTERVENTIONS: Anesthetized young (Y, 2-3 months) and aged (A, 22-24 months) male Wistar rats were randomized to 4 groups (n = 6 per group). Control animals (Y-Con and A-Con) were not treated further; RIPC groups (Y-RIPC and A-RIPC) received 4 cycles of 5 minutes of bilateral hind limb ischemia interspersed with 5 minutes reperfusion before myocardial ischemia and reperfusion. All animals underwent 25 minutes of regional myocardial ischemia and 120 minutes of reperfusion. At the end of reperfusion, infarct size was determined by TTC staining. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the control group of young rats, infarct size was 56±9% of the area at risk. RIPC reduced infarct size to 31±9% (p<0.05 v Y-Con). Cardioprotection by RIPC was abolished completely in the aged rat heart (A-RIPC: 62±8%, A-Con: 63±4%; ns). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the authors' study showed that cardioprotection induced by remote ischemic preconditioning was blocked in the aged rat heart.
OBJECTIVES: In animal studies, remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC) is a powerful tool to protect the heart from ischemia and reperfusion injury. Unfortunately, this effect was not seen consistently in recent large clinical trials. Aging was shown to be a confounding factor for the effect of direct preconditioning in experimental studies, but whether aging also can influence the effect of RIPC and thus be responsible for the contradictory clinical effect is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the cardioprotective effect of RIPC was abolished by aging. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, blinded laboratory investigation. SETTING: Experimental laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Male Wistar rats. INTERVENTIONS: Anesthetized young (Y, 2-3 months) and aged (A, 22-24 months) male Wistar rats were randomized to 4 groups (n = 6 per group). Control animals (Y-Con and A-Con) were not treated further; RIPC groups (Y-RIPC and A-RIPC) received 4 cycles of 5 minutes of bilateral hind limb ischemia interspersed with 5 minutes reperfusion before myocardial ischemia and reperfusion. All animals underwent 25 minutes of regional myocardial ischemia and 120 minutes of reperfusion. At the end of reperfusion, infarct size was determined by TTC staining. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the control group of young rats, infarct size was 56±9% of the area at risk. RIPC reduced infarct size to 31±9% (p<0.05 v Y-Con). Cardioprotection by RIPC was abolished completely in the aged rat heart (A-RIPC: 62±8%, A-Con: 63±4%; ns). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the authors' study showed that cardioprotection induced by remote ischemic preconditioning was blocked in the aged rat heart.
Authors: Joseph Wider; Vishnu V R Undyala; Peter Whittaker; James Woods; Xuequn Chen; Karin Przyklenk Journal: Basic Res Cardiol Date: 2018-03-09 Impact factor: 17.165
Authors: Rianne Nederlof; Nina C Weber; Nicole P Juffermans; Bas A M J de Mol; Markus W Hollmann; Benedikt Preckel; Coert J Zuurbier Journal: BMC Anesthesiol Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 2.217
Authors: André Heinen; Friederike Behmenburg; Aykut Aytulun; Maximilian Dierkes; Lea Zerbin; Wolfgang Kaisers; Maximilian Schaefer; Tanja Meyer-Treschan; Susanne Feit; Inge Bauer; Markus W Hollmann; Ragnar Huhn Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Marie Vognstoft Hjortbak; Thomas Skjærlund Grønnebæk; Nichlas Riise Jespersen; Thomas Ravn Lassen; Jacob Marthinsen Seefeldt; Pernille Tilma Tonnesen; Rebekka Vibjerg Jensen; Lauren Gerard Koch; Steven L Britton; Michael Pedersen; Niels Jessen; Hans Erik Bøtker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 3.240