| Literature DB >> 29057895 |
Otávio C Bezerra1, Cristiane Miranda França2,3, Juraci Aparecida Rocha4, Gizele A Neves1, Pamella Ramona M Souza1, Mariana Teixeira Gomes1, Christiane Malfitano4, Tatiane C Alba Loleiro5, Paulo Magno Dourado4, Susana Llesuy6, Katia de Angelis1, Maria Claudia C Irigoyen4, Luis Ulloa7, Fernanda M Consolim-Colombo1,4.
Abstract
We previously reported that cholinergic stimulation with pyridostigmine (PY) induces anti-inflammatory cell recruitment soon after myocardial infarction (MI). In this study, we evaluated the anti-inflammatory effects of PY during the proliferative phase of cardiac repair by analyzing the infiltration of macrophages, Treg lymphocytes, oxidative stress and inflammatory cytokines. Wistar rats underwent control sham surgery or ligation of the left coronary artery and were randomly allocated to remain untreated (untreated infarcted group, I) or to receive PY (30 mg·kg(-1)·day(-1)) in the supplied water (infarcted treated group, I + PY). Blood pressure and heart rate variability were registered at day 5 post-MI. The animals were euthanized 7 days after thoracotomy, when the hearts were removed and processed for immunohistochemistry (CD68, CD206, FOXP3), cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10, TNF-α) and oxidative stress (superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione peroxidase, lipidic and protein peroxidation). PY treatment increased parasympathetic modulation, M2 macrophages and the anti-oxidant enzyme activity but reduced protein oxidation (carbonyls) and the concentration of IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α and IL-10. Cholinergic stimulation induces parasympathetic neuro-immune modulation and anti-inflammatory cell enrollment as well as prevents oxidative stress and cytokine production after MI.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29057895 PMCID: PMC5651932 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14021-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Hemodynamic and cardiovascular autonomic values in studied groups.
| S | I | I + PY | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| SBP (mmHg) | 121 ± 2.3 | 117 ± 1.6* | 114 ± 3.8 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 82 ± 0.9 | 88 ± 0.3* | 83 ± 1.2# |
| HR (bpm) | 337 ± 11.9 | 382 ± 13.4* | 372 ± 8.4* |
|
| |||
| LF (abs) | 1.5 ± 1.7 | 5.5 ± 4.3 | 1.4 ± 1.4 |
| HF (abs) | 6.4 ± 3.7 | 13.7 ± 8.7 | 7.0 ± 1.9 |
| LF (NU) | 16.8 ± 3 | 28.7 ± 5* | 14.7 ± 1# |
| HF (NU) | 83.2 ± 3 | 71.3 ± 5* | 85.3 ± 1# |
| LF/HF | 0.2 ± 0.04 | 0.4 ± 0.1 | 0.2 ± 0.01 |
Abbreviations: SBP = systolic blood pressure, DBP = diastolic blood pressure, HR = heart rate, LF = low-frequency band (0.20–0.75 Hz), HF = high-frequency band (0.75–4.0 Hz). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM.
*P < 0.05 vs Sham group; #P < 0.05 vs MI (n = 5, for each group).
Echocardiographic parameters in studied groups.
| Eco parameters | S | I | I + PY |
|---|---|---|---|
| MI area (%) | 0 | 48.6 ± 14.3* | 29.6 ± 2.14* |
| LV EF (%) | 43.1 ± 2.5 | 25.4 ± 1.7* | 24.6 ± 1.8* |
| LV FAC (%) | 61.0 ± 6.1 | 28.7 ± 3.6* | 36.4 ± 2.2* |
| LV mass (g/Kg) | 3.6 ± 0.24 | 4.7 ± 0.5 | 3.7 ± 0.21 |
| LAD (cm) | 0.43 ± 0.01 | 0.48 ± 0.04 | 0.44 ± 0.02 |
| LVDD (cm) | 0.78 ± 0.04 | 0.88 ± 0.09 | 0.80 ± 0.03 |
| LVSD (cm) | 0.44 ± 0.02 | 0.66 ± 0.07* | 0.60 ± 0.02* |
| LVD area (cm2) | 0.48 ± 0.06 | 0.64 ± 0.08 | 0.60 ± 0.04 |
| LVS area (cm2) | 0.19 ± 0.05 | 0.46 ± 0.06* | 0.38 ± 0.02* |
| ST vol (ml) | 0.19 ± 0.02 | 0.13 ± 0.04* | 0.19 ± 0.0*# |
| E/A | 2.2 ± 0.31 | 4.0 ± 0.25* | 2.6 ± 0.30# |
| IVRT/RR | 0.09 ± 0.02 | 0.08 ± 0.01 | 0.09 ± 0.01 |
MI = myocardial.
LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction.
FAC = fractional area change.
LVFAC = left ventricular.
LAD = left atrial diameter.
LVDD = end-diameter during diastole.
LVSD = left ventricular end systolic diameter.
LVD area = left ventricular diastolic area.
LVS area = left ventricular systolic area.
E/A = E wave A wave ratio.
IVRT/RR = isovolumetric relaxation and time RR interval ratio.
Values are expressed as as mean ± SEM.
*P < 0.05vs Sham group; #p < 0.05 vs I group; (n = 5, for each group).
Figure 1CD68 + cell count (Total macrophages). The macrophages were stained in brown, and the total area occupied by these cells was measured. Both I and I + PY groups showed dense infiltration of CD68 + cell within the infarcted and peri-infarcted zone with no statistical difference (P = 0.9, Kruskal-Wallis test). As expected, both groups were statistically different from the Sham group (P < 0.05, Kruskal-Wallis test completed by Dunn’s multiple comparison test). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. (Immunohistochemistry, DAB, scale bar 400 μm).
Figure 2M2 macrophage (CD206+) cell count. The M2 macrophages were stained in brown, and the total area occupied by these cells was measured. Sham animals presented no M2 macrophages; I + PY group showed higher infiltration of CD206 + cell within the infarcted and peri-infarcted zone when compared to the I group (P = 0.04, Kruskal-Wallis test). The I group and I + PY were statistically different from the Sham group (P = 0.003 and P < 0.0001, respectively, Kruskal-Wallis). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. (Immunohistochemistry, DAB, scale bar 400 μm).
Figure 3Treg cells (FOXP3+ lymphocytes) cell count. Treg cells were stained in brown, and the total area occupied by these cells was measured. Sham animals presented no Treg cells; I + PY group showed a higher infiltration of FOXP3+ cells within the infarcted and peri-infarcted zone when compared to I groups (P = 0.007, Kruskal-Wallis test). As expected, I group and I + PY were statistically different from the Sham group (P < 0.0001, Kruskal-Wallis test). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. (Immunohistochemistry, DAB, scale bar 400 μm).
Figure 4Antioxidant enzyme activity. Superoxide dismutase activity (SOD) (A), Catalase (CAT) (B), and GPX activity (C) were significantly lower in the infarcted rats (I group) when compared to sham animals (S group). Infarcted rats treated with PY (I + PY) presented a significantly higher activity of all anti-oxidant enzymes when compared to the untreated rats. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05 vs Sham; # P < 0.05 vs I (n = 7) for each group (two-way ANOVA test with Tukey as post hoc).
Figure 5Lipid peroxidation and protein oxidation. Lipid peroxidation, obtained by measurement of TBARS, increased similarly in both infarcted groups (I and I + PY) t when compared to the S group (A). Protein oxidation, obtained by measurement of carbonyl groups (carbonyls) was significantly higher in the I group when compared to S group. However, in the I + PY group carbonyls were significantly lower when compared to I group, reaching values similar to those of the S group. (B). Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05 vs Sham; # P < 0.05 vs I (n = 7) for each group, (two-way ANOVA test with Tukey as post hoc).
Figure 6Cytokine concentrations. When compared to the S group, the I group, presented significantly higher concentrations of the pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1β (A), IL-6 (B) and TNF-α (C), and anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 (D). Conversely, I + PY animals presented significantly lower values when compared to I animals. Furthermore, no differences in cytokines concentrations were observed when I + PY was compared to S group. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05 vs Sham; # P < 0.05 vs I (n = 7) for each group (two-way ANOVA test with Tukey as post hoc).