| Literature DB >> 33723566 |
Fotios G Pitoulis1, Raquel Nunez-Toldra1, Ke Xiao2, Worrapong Kit-Anan1, Saskia Mitzka2, Richard J Jabbour1, Sian E Harding1, Filippo Perbellini2, Thomas Thum1,2, Pieter P de Tombe3, Cesare M Terracciano1.
Abstract
AIMS: Cardiac remodelling is the process by which the heart adapts to its environment. Mechanical load is a major driver of remodelling. Cardiac tissue culture has been frequently employed for in vitro studies of load-induced remodelling; however, current in vitro protocols (e.g. cyclic stretch, isometric load, and auxotonic load) are oversimplified and do not accurately capture the dynamic sequence of mechanical conformational changes experienced by the heart in vivo. This limits translational scope and relevance of findings. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: zzm321990 In vitro cardiac tissue culture; Mechanical load; Myocardial remodelling; Myocardial slices; Pressure overload; Volume overload
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 33723566 PMCID: PMC8859636 DOI: 10.1093/cvr/cvab084
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Res ISSN: 0008-6363 Impact factor: 10.787
Figure 6Functional enrichment analysis of transcriptomic signatures. (A) Gene ontology analysis of volume-overloaded cultured and (B) pressure-overloaded LMS.
Figure 2Adult cardiac tissue culture under adaptive electromechanical stimulation. (A) Algorithm used by the bioreactor during the 3 day culture. Each force-transient produced by LMS was sampled and fed to the 3EWK model. If the force changed the length-transient performed on the LMS adapted to reflect that based on a PID algorithm. This ensured the bioreactor was always adapting to the remodelling tissue. (B) Representative 3 day force-length loops and force-length transients for the LMS cultured under physiological load, pressure-overload, or volume-overload. (C) Modified time-varying elastance for assessment of contractile state. Grey straight lines are isochrones constrained at the LMS’s RL (∼8.2 mm in graph). Only a fraction of the isochrones is plotted for clarity. (D) Maximum elastance, Emax, corresponding to load-independent intrinsic contractile state for the three groups across time. Note: All LMS start at the same Emax. Data shown as mean ± SEM; (N = 6). P-value was calculated using two-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparison test.
Selected significantly different genes in volume- and pressure-overload compared to physiological load
| Gene | ΔVO | ΔPO | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cellular adhesion molecules | ||||
| Itga3 | ↑ | n.s | ||
| Itga9 | ↓ | n.s | ||
| Itgbl1 | ↑ | n.s | ||
| rhoc | ↑ | ↑ | ||
| ankrd37 | n.s | ↓ | ||
| ankrd52 | n.s | ↑ | ||
| PI3K-AKT | ||||
| IGF | ↑ | n.s | ||
| FGFR2 | ↑ | n.s | ||
| NGFR | ↑ | n.s | ||
| VEGFA | ↑ | n.s | ||
| PDGFRA | ↑ | n.s | ||
| JAK2 | ↑ | n.s | ||
| NF-κB | ||||
| C3 | n.s | ↑ | ||
| CXCL1 | n.s | ↓ | ||
| BCL2L1 | n.s | ↓ | ||
| CDKN21A | n.s | ↓ | ||
| STAT5A | n.s | ↑ | ||