| Literature DB >> 35991771 |
Zhaoying Liang1,2, Qiaohuang Zeng1,2,3, Xiaomin Ou1, Jing Cai1, Taohua Lan1,2,3,4, Weihui Lu1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Background: Considered an effective supplementary therapy, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) has been widely applied in the treatment of coronary heart disease (CHD). In this study, we aim to investigate the effects and mechanisms of Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction (HTCSD, an in-hospital TCM prescription) in the treatment of CHD with the phlegm-damp syndrome in mice by non-targeted metabolomics with liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS)/MS.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35991771 PMCID: PMC9391147 DOI: 10.1155/2022/6532003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiol Res Pract ISSN: 2090-0597 Impact factor: 1.990
Figure 1Electrocardiography and echocardiography. (a) ECGs of limb lead II of mice were recorded to evaluate the changes of the ST segment and T wave. (b) LVPW and IVS of mice were measured by echocardiography. Abbreviations: ECG: electrocardiogram, LVPW: left ventricular posterior wall thickness, IVS: interventricular septal thickness, HTCSD : Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Changes of the ST segment in the ECG of mice (mean ± S.D, n = 5–6).
| ST height (mV) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0s | 1 min | 5 min | 10 min | 20 min | |
| Control | 0.1118 ± 0.0383 | 0.0991 ± 0.0394 | 0.1145 ± 0.0357 | 0.1531 ± 0.0399 | 0.1456 ± 0.0453 |
| Tanshi | −0.2387 ± 0.0450 | −0.2557 ± 0.0614 | −0.2321 ± 0.0958 | −0.2291 ± 0.0977 | −0.2062 ± 0.0694 |
| HTCSD | −0.1608 ± 0.0393# | −0.1148 ± 0.0781## | −0.1305 ± 0.0551# | −0.1169 ± 0.0438# | −0.0800 ± 0.0413## |
Note:P-value<0.01 (Tanshi vs Control), #P-value<0.05 (HTCSD vs Tanshi), and ##P-value<0.01 (HTCSD vs Tanshi). ECG: electrocardiogram, HTCSD: Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Changes of T wave in the ECG of mice (mean ± S.D, n = 5–6).
| T Amplitude (mV) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0s | 1 min | 5 min | 10 min | 20 min | |
| Control | 0.1289 ± 0.0291 | 0.1133 ± 0.0313 | 0.1270 ± 0.0357 | 0.1415 ± 0.0355 | 0.1638 ± 0.0413 |
| Tanshi | −0.1980 ± 0.0265 | −0.2169 ± 0.0460 | −0.2276 ± 0.0722 | −0.2256 ± 0.0538 | −0.1838 ± 0.0578 |
| HTCSD | −0.1494 ± 0.0419 | −0.1297 ± 0.0738# | −0.1250 ± 0.0489## | −0.1218 ± 0.0558## | −0.1161 ± 0.0748 |
Note:P-value<0.01 (Tanshi vs Control), #P-value<0.05 (HTCSD vs Tanshi), and ##P-value<0.01 (HTCSD vs Tanshi). ECG: electrocardiogram, HTCSD: Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Comparison of LVPW and IVS measured by echocardiography (mean ± S.D, n = 5–6).
| IVSD (mm) | IVSS (mm) | LVPWD (mm) | LVPWS (mm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 0.88 ± 0.24 | 1.35 ± 0.34 | 1.14 ± 0.30 | 1.50 ± 0.29 |
| Tanshi | 1.20 ± 0.10 | 2.08 ± 0.35 | 1.68 ± 0.24 | 2.03 ± 0.44 |
| HTCSD | 0.91 ± 0.26# | 1.83 ± 0.17 | 1.28 ± 0.27# | 1.51 ± 0.33# |
Note:p-value<0.05 (Tanshi vs Control), P-value<0.01 (Tanshi vs Control), and #P-value<0.05 (HTCSD vs Tanshi). IVSD: interventricular septal thickness at diastole, IVSS: interventricular septal thickness at systole, LVPWD: left ventricular posterior wall thickness at diastole, LVPWS: left ventricular posterior wall thickness at systole, ECG: electrocardiogram, HTCSD: Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Figure 2Serum biochemical analysis and histomorphology. (a) Serums were collected to evaluate the levels of CK-MB, cTnT, LDH, and oxLDL and are shown as mean ± S.D (n = 5–6). P-value<0.01 (Tanshi vs Control), ##P-value<0.01 (HTCSD vs Tanshi), and #P-value<0.05 (HTCSD vs Tanshi). (b) H&E staining (scale bar = 50 μm) was used to observe the pathological changes of the myocardium of the left ventricle. Abbreviations: CK-MB: creatine phosphokinase-Mb, cTnT: cardiac troponin T LDH: lactic dehydrogenase, oxLDL: oxidized low-density lipoprotein, H&E: hematoxylin and eosin. HTCSD: Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Figure 3Score plots of PCA and PLS-DA. (a) Score plot of principle component analysis (PCA). (b) Score plot of partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA). Abbreviations: HTCSD : Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Figure 4Serum metabolism profile alterations and metabolite-associated pathways. (a) The amount of differential metabolites among the experimental groups. (b) Heatmap of top 50 differential metabolites in the HTCSD vs Tanshi group. (c) Clusters of time sequence analysis of differential metabolites among the experimental groups. (d) The column chart of the top 20 KEGG pathways in the Tanshi vs control group. (e) The column chart of the top 20 KEGG pathways in the HTCSD vs Tanshi group. Abbreviations: HTCSD : Huo-Tan-Chu-Shi decoction.
Differential metabolites of cluster 2, cluster 5, and cluster 8 (membership>0.4).
| Cluster number | Metabolites | Membership |
|---|---|---|
| Cluster 2 | FAD | 0.710145334 |
| Cluster 2 | Fucoxanthinol 3-myristoleate | 0.693372847 |
| Cluster 2 | PE(0 : 0/22 : 6(4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z,19Z)) | 0.664223572 |
| Cluster 2 | SM(d18 : 0/16 : 0) | 0.450356799 |
| Cluster 2 | Cadusafos | 0.416098027 |
| Cluster 2 | (3Z)-2-propylpent-3-enoic acid | 0.401266799 |
| Cluster 5 | 5-Deoxydiplosporin | 0.859002946 |
| Cluster 5 | Inosine triphosphate | 0.853761932 |
| Cluster 5 | SLF | 0.839544464 |
| Cluster 5 | Garcinia lactone dibutyl ester | 0.835935897 |
| Cluster 5 | 9-Hydroperoxy-12,13-dihydroxy-10-octadecenoic acid | 0.832606958 |
| Cluster 5 | PC(14 : 0/20 : 3(8Z,11Z,14Z)) | 0.806742973 |
| Cluster 5 | 2,5-Octadien-1-ol | 0.784832227 |
| Cluster 5 | 3-Methyl-3-butenyl apiosyl-(1->6)-glucoside | 0.68681373 |
| Cluster 5 | Histidine-Phenylalanine | 0.665285993 |
| Cluster 5 | 5,10-Methenyltetrahydrofolate | 0.658926736 |
| Cluster 5 | 3a,21-Dihydroxy-5b-pregnane-11,20-dione | 0.633962294 |
| Cluster 5 | (2-Methyl-3-phenylpropoxy)sulfonic acid | 0.632564399 |
| Cluster 5 | Zizyphine A | 0.616615337 |
| Cluster 5 | DG(22 : 4(7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)/24 : 0/0 : 0) | 0.615378609 |
| Cluster 5 | Militarinone B | 0.610631061 |
| Cluster 5 | PE(O-18 : 1(9Z)/0 : 0) | 0.596672725 |
| Cluster 5 | Lipoxin D4 | 0.580309909 |
| Cluster 5 | Sphingosine | 0.57731702 |
| Cluster 5 | PC(O-16 : 0/0 : 0) | 0.564222357 |
| Cluster 5 | Uralenneoside | 0.56046916 |
| Cluster 5 | Hoffmanniolide | 0.552641588 |
| Cluster 5 | 4-(2,6,6-Trimethyl-1-cyclohexenyl)-2-butanol | 0.552081026 |
| Cluster 5 | Tetraneurin A | 0.531319613 |
| Cluster 5 | 2-O-(beta-D-galactopyranosyl-(1->6)-beta-D-galactopyranosyl) 2S,3R-dihydroxynonanoic acid | 0.511911474 |
| Cluster 5 | Terbutaline-1-sulfate | 0.500476178 |
| Cluster 5 | OKDdiA-PE | 0.498764561 |
| Cluster 5 | Valorphin | 0.480345113 |
| Cluster 5 | PHOHA-PS | 0.466379377 |
| Cluster 5 | Galabiosylceramide (d18 : 1/24 : 1(15Z)) | 0.465226025 |
| Cluster 5 | ((3,4,5-Trihydroxy-6-(1,2,6-trihydroxy-3-(hydroxy(3,4,5-trihydroxyoxan-2-yl) methyl)-4-oxocyclohexa-2,5-dien-1-yl)oxan-2-yl) methoxy)sulfonic acid | 0.460888285 |
| Cluster 5 | 15-Cyclohexyl pentanor PGF2alpha | 0.45349852 |
| Cluster 5 | Tryptophyl-asparagine | 0.434188447 |
| Cluster 5 | Beauvericin | 0.418981588 |
| Cluster 5 | 9,10-Dihydroxy-13-hydroperoxy-11-octadecenoic acid | 0.408170734 |
| Cluster 5 | 11-Deoxy-11-methylene-PGD2 | 0.402497413 |
| Cluster 5 | OKOOA-PC | 0.402386826 |
| Cluster 8 | PC(18 : 0/P-18 : 1(11z)) | 0.762565962 |
| Cluster 8 | PS(P-18 : 0/0 : 0) | 0.751504134 |
| Cluster 8 | N-Methyl-a-aminoisobutyric acid | 0.718517348 |
| Cluster 8 | Rutagravine | 0.701523565 |
| Cluster 8 | PS(20 : 4(5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)/19 : 0) | 0.690096004 |
| Cluster 8 | Streptidine | 0.574309645 |
| Cluster 8 | LysoPC(20 : 4(8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)) | 0.567252783 |
| Cluster 8 | PC(18 : 1(9Z)/P-18 : 1(9z)) | 0.508347134 |
| Cluster 8 | LysoPC(18 : 2(9Z,12Z)) | 0.477289213 |
| Cluster 8 | PC(16 : 1(9Z)/18 : 1(9z)) | 0.437316248 |
| Cluster 8 | PC(20 : 2(11Z,14Z)/14 : 0) | 0.428489908 |
| Cluster 8 | 31-Hydroxy rifabutin | 0.423115022 |
Note: The value of membership indicates the degree of differential metabolites conform with the relevant cluster.