| Literature DB >> 32595731 |
Yuemin Li1, Peng Xu1, Yang Wang2, Junshi Zhang1, Mei Yang1, Yumei Chang3, Ping Zheng1, Heling Huang4, Xuebin Cao1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether exercise preconditioning (EP) improves the rat cardiac dysfunction induced by exhaustive exercise (EE) through regulating NOD-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammatory pathways and to confirm which intensity of EP is better.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32595731 PMCID: PMC7301185 DOI: 10.1155/2020/5809298
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Microstructure of the myocardium using an optical microscope in each group of rats (HE ×400). (a) The control group, (b) the exhaustive exercise group, (c) the low-intensity exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group, (d) the middle-intensity exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group, and (e) the intense exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group. n = 8 per group. (A) The arrow shows myocardial rupture. (B) The arrow shows myocardial cell edema and inflammatory infiltration. (C) The arrow shows myocardial hyperplasia and edema.
Figure 2The effect of EP with different intensities on the serum (a) CK-MB, (b) ROS, (c) CRP, (d) IL-6, and (e) TNF-α levels in exhausted rats.
The effect of EP with different intensity on cardiac function parameters in exhausted rats (, CON and HEP + EE, n = 10; EE, LEP + EE, and MEP + EE, n = 8).
| CON | EE | LEP + EE | MEP + EE | HEP + EE | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| CO (ml/min) | 31.33 ± 6.89 | 62.78 ± 9.60 | 44.78 ± 6.87 | 38.09 ± 9.54 | 61.01 ± 12.78 |
| SV ( | 96.69 ± 15.73 | 188.34 ± 39.33 | 105.97 ± 25.16# | 99.17 ± 19.96# | 117.17 ± 17.43# |
| Ves ( | 152.29 ± 23.86 | 235.97 ± 65.06 | 147.59 ± 69.20# | 107.79 ± 35.70# | 152.23 ± 28.17# |
| Ved ( | 220.48 ± 31.69 | 430.26 ± 88.97 | 236.35 ± 65.06# | 226.61 ± 32.06# | 262.66 ± 35.37# |
| Pes (mmHg) | 111.79 ± 18.47 | 115.43 ± 27.70 | 109.72 ± 21.43 | 137.79 ± 18.62 | 133.38 ± 20.69 |
| Pdev (mmHg) | 111.03 ± 18.73 | 96.44 ± 20.59 | 111.99 ± 19.13 | 139.81 ± 20.24 | 135.41 ± 16.53 |
| HR (bpm) | 320.41 ± 28.94 | 298.28 ± 58.59 | 344.33 ± 83.40 | 396.24 ± 12.65 | 397.67 ± 23.54 |
|
| |||||
|
| |||||
| EF (%) | 44.24 ± 8.80 | 40.07 ± 8.12 | 56.74 ± 15.98 | 61.25 ± 8.74 | 58.15 ± 7.33 |
| dP/dtmax (mmHg/s) | 11025 ± 4472 | 7894 ± 2803 | 9518 ± 3299 | 13935 ± 2696#▲ | 13171 ± 2350#▲ |
| ESPVR | 0.81 ± 0.39 | 0.28 ± 0.12 | 0.73 ± 0.31# | 0.78 ± 0.29# | 1.03 ± 0.22#▲ |
|
| |||||
|
| |||||
| −d | −10718 ± 5866 | −8346 ± 3093 | −8985 ± 3987 | −14068 ± 3221#▲ | −11589 ± 2889 |
| Tau (ms) | 4.76 ± 5.10 | 11.03 ± 2.46 | 11.47 ± 3.37 | 8.34 ± 1.07 | 9.71 ± 1.85 |
CON: the control group (n = 10), EE: the exhaustive exercise group (n = 8), LEP + EE: the low-intensity exercise Epreconditioning + exhaustive exercise group (n = 8), MEP + EE: the middle-intensity exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group (n = 8), HEP + EE: the group intense exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group (n = 10). CO: cardiac output; SV: stroke volume; Ves: end-systolic volume; Ved: end-diastolic volume; Pes: end-systolic pressure; Pdev: left ventricular development pressure; HR: heart rate; EF: ejection fraction; dP/dtmax: peak rate of the increase in pressure; ESPVR: slope of end-systolic pressure volume relationship; –dP/dtmin: peak rate of the decrease in pressure; Tau: relaxation time constant; P < 0.05, compared with the CON group; #P < 0.05, compared with the EE group; ▲P < 0.05, compared with the LEP + EE group; ☆P < 0.05, compared with the MEP + EE group.
Figure 3The comparisons with the relative expressions of myocardial protein TXNIP, TRX, NF-ĸBp65, NLRP3, and Caspase-1 in each group rats (n = 8, ). (a) Ratio of TXNIP/β-actin in rats' myocardium; (b) ratio of TRX/β-actin in rats' myocardium; (c) ratio of NF-ĸBp65/β-actin in rats' myocardium; (d) ratio of NLRP3/β-actin in rats' myocardium; and (e) ratio of Caspase-1/β-actin in rats' myocardium. β-Actin: protein internal reference; TXNIP: thioredoxin-interacting protein; TRX: thioredoxin protein; NF-ĸBp65: nuclear transcription factor kappa Bp65; NLRP3; NLRP3 inflammatory; and Caspase-1: cysteinaspartate specific proteinase 1. A: the control group, B: the exhaustive exercise group, C: the low-intensity exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group, D: the middle-intensity exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group, and E: the group intense exercise preconditioning + exhaustive exercise group.P < 0.05, compared with the CON group; #P < 0.05, compared with the EE group; ΔP < 0.05, compared with the LEP + EE group.
Pearson's correlation analysis of NLRP3, HR, EF, IL-6, and ROS in rats with preadaptive exercise of different intensity (r, n = 8).
| Group | HR (bpm) | EF (%) | IL-6 (pg/ml) | ROS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON | 0.25 | −0.02 | 0.14 | 0.87 |
| EE | 0.08 | −0.12 | 0.46 | 0.11 |
| LEP + EE | 0.03 | −0.32 | 0.66 | 0.24 |
| MEP + EE | 0.75 | −0.89 | 0.39 | 0.08 |
| HEP + EE | 0.56 | −0.84 | 0.87 | 0.03 |
The data show Pearson's correlation coefficient (r), n = 8 animals per group. NLRP3: NLRP3 inflammatory; HR: heart Rate; EF: ejection fraction; IL-6: interleukin-6; ROS: reactive oxygen species. For groups, see the footnote to Table 1. P < 0.05, P < 0.01.