UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was to determine whether regional beta-adrenergic blockade via the coronary sinus limited myocardial damage after coronary artery occlusion in the canine model. Accordingly, open-chest anesthetized dogs were randomly allocated to one of three groups: a control group and groups treated with propranolol (in doses of 0.02, 0.2, and 2.0 mg/kg) given either intravenously or via the coronary sinus. The hypoperfused zone (i.e., risk area) and the extent of myocardial damage were assessed by autoradiography and triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining, respectively. Myocardial damage expressed as a percent of the hypoperfused zone was 84 +/- 5% in the control group (n = 9) and 78 +/- 7% (0.02 mg/kg, n = 7, NS), 63 +/- 6% (0.2 mg/kg, n = 7, p less than 0.05), and 62 +/- 7% (2.0 mg/kg, n = 9, p less than 0.02) in the groups receiving intravenous propranolol and 73 +/- 6% (0.02 mg/kg, n = 7, NS), 58 +/- 7% (0.2 mg/kg, n = 7, p less than 0.01), and 44 +/- 9% (2.0 mg/kg, n = 9, p less than 0.001) in groups receiving propranolol via the cardiac veins. There was a significant enhancement of myocardial salvage with increasing doses of propranolol delivered via the cardiac veins (linear regression trend, p less than 0.05). In contrast, myocardial damage expressed as a percent of the hypoperfused zone remained comparable with propranolol doses of 0.2 and 2.0 mg/kg administered intravenously (linear regression trend, NS). IN CONCLUSION: (1) regional beta-adrenergic blockade via the cardiac veins afforded significant myocardial salvage and (2) the regional administration of propranolol resulted in significant reduction of myocardial damage in a dose-dependent fashion.
UNLABELLED: The aim of the study was to determine whether regional beta-adrenergic blockade via the coronary sinus limited myocardial damage after coronary artery occlusion in the canine model. Accordingly, open-chest anesthetized dogs were randomly allocated to one of three groups: a control group and groups treated with propranolol (in doses of 0.02, 0.2, and 2.0 mg/kg) given either intravenously or via the coronary sinus. The hypoperfused zone (i.e., risk area) and the extent of myocardial damage were assessed by autoradiography and triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining, respectively. Myocardial damage expressed as a percent of the hypoperfused zone was 84 +/- 5% in the control group (n = 9) and 78 +/- 7% (0.02 mg/kg, n = 7, NS), 63 +/- 6% (0.2 mg/kg, n = 7, p less than 0.05), and 62 +/- 7% (2.0 mg/kg, n = 9, p less than 0.02) in the groups receiving intravenous propranolol and 73 +/- 6% (0.02 mg/kg, n = 7, NS), 58 +/- 7% (0.2 mg/kg, n = 7, p less than 0.01), and 44 +/- 9% (2.0 mg/kg, n = 9, p less than 0.001) in groups receiving propranolol via the cardiac veins. There was a significant enhancement of myocardial salvage with increasing doses of propranolol delivered via the cardiac veins (linear regression trend, p less than 0.05). In contrast, myocardial damage expressed as a percent of the hypoperfused zone remained comparable with propranolol doses of 0.2 and 2.0 mg/kg administered intravenously (linear regression trend, NS). IN CONCLUSION: (1) regional beta-adrenergic blockade via the cardiac veins afforded significant myocardial salvage and (2) the regional administration of propranolol resulted in significant reduction of myocardial damage in a dose-dependent fashion.