This Article Full Text Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kapadia, S. J. Articles by Most, A. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kapadia, S. J. Articles by Most, A. S.

(Circulation. 1997;95:1286-1292.)
© 1997 American Heart Association, Inc.

Articles

Presence of a Critical Coronary Artery Stenosis Does Not Abolish the Protective Effect of Ischemic Preconditioning

Shaival J. Kapadia, MD; Joseph S. Terlato, MD; Albert S. Most, MD

Rhode Island Hospital, Brown University, Providence.

Correspondence to Albert S. Most, MD, Physician-in-Chief, Department of Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, 593 Eddy St, Providence, RI 02903.

Background Episodic, severe coronary artery flow restriction preconditions the myocardium much like brief occlusions. The necessity for full reperfusion after a preconditioning intervention to elicit the preconditioning response is unclear. This study investigated in closed-chest swine the effect of a persistent critical coronary stenosis with moderate flow reduction on ischemic preconditioning.

Methods and Results Farm pigs (n=23) assigned to one of four groups—(1) control, (2) stenosis, (3) preconditioned (PC), or (4) preconditioned plus stenosis (PC/S)—underwent percutaneous instrumentation with a percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty catheter advanced to the mid–left anterior descending coronary artery. An artificial coronary stenosis (82% diameter reduction) was mounted on the catheter just proximal to the balloon in the two stenosis groups. Preconditioning stimulus consisted of two 10-minute balloon occlusions followed by 15 minutes of reperfusion. All groups subsequently underwent 45 minutes of occlusion followed by 120 minutes of reperfusion. Baseline regional myocardial blood flow in the area at risk (AAR), measured with colored microspheres, was lowest in the stenosis groups, with flow expressed as a percentage of normal zone flow. Infarct size (percent of AAR), determined by staining slices of the heart with triphenyltetrazolium, was significantly reduced in PC compared with control pigs (15.1±5.9% versus 66.8±6.4%, respectively; P<.001). Infarct size in PC/S pigs was also significantly reduced (29.7±7.1%, P=.004 versus control) but was not different in degree from PC pigs (P=.6). The stenosis by itself conferred no preconditioning benefit (percent of AAR=69.0±5.4%).

Conclusions A moderate flow-limiting stenosis did not prevent preconditioning but may have attenuated the effect. This may be analogous to the clinical scenario in which intermittent coronary occlusion and reperfusion superimposed on a critical stenosis precede a prolonged occlusion treated with thrombolysis.

Key Words: stenosis • myocardial infarction • ischemic preconditioning

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. Ferdinandy, R. Schulz, and G. F. Baxter Interaction of Cardiovascular Risk Factors with Myocardial Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury, Preconditioning, and Postconditioning Pharmacol. Rev., December 1, 2007; 59(4): 418 - 458. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. D Verdouw, M. A van den Doel, S. de Zeeuw, and D. J Duncker Animal models in the study of myocardial ischaemia and ischaemic syndromes Cardiovasc Res, July 1, 1998; 39(1): 121 - 135. [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Duncker, P. D. Verdouw, A. S. Most, J. S. Terlato, and S. J. Kapadia Effects of Ischemic Preconditioning • Response Circulation, March 31, 1998; 97(12): 1211 - 1212. [Full Text] [PDF]