Inducible NO Synthase mRNA Expression and Infiltration of Rats Myocardium with Inflammatory Cells in 2-4 Hours after Modeled Permanent Ischemia or Ischemia/Reperfusion

Ivanov, Evgeniy V.; Бердалин, А. Б.; Volkova, Yu.V.; Markov, M. A.; Davydova, M. P.; Гаврилова, С.А.

doi:10.1007/s10517-018-3975-3

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies comparing protein or mRNA expression in infarcted tissue post-MI have shown differences between PL and IR. However, these studies mainly detected differences in tissue injury markers, which could be caused by differences in infarct sizes between the techniques (Charles et al, 2000;Ivanov et al, 2018). In particular, a comparative proteomics study on heart tissue from PL and IR mice carried out by De Celle et al identified several proteins with differential expression specific to each technique (De Celle et al, 2004).…”

Section: Comparing the Utility Of The Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mouse models of myocardial infarction: comparing permanent ligation and ischaemia-reperfusion

Villiers

Riley

2020

Disease Models &Amp; Mechanisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Myocardial infarction (MI) is a disease of major consequence in the modern world, causing permanent, irreversible damage to the heart. Survivors are at risk for developing further cardiovascular pathologies such as heart failure. Further study of MI injury is crucial to improve the understanding and treatment of the post-MI heart. The most commonly used model for MI in vivo is surgical ligation of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). There are two predominant approaches: permanent ligation (PL), where the LAD is permanently occluded with a suture, or ischaemia-reperfusion (IR), where the LAD is temporarily occluded before removing the suture to restore blood flow and tissue reperfusion. PL results in the majority of the area at risk becoming infarcted, leading to significant apoptotic cell death and a large scar. Conversely, IR salvages some of the area at risk; thus, the scar is smaller and includes reperfusion injury, an additional, albeit smaller, second wave of necrotic damage. PL may be a more appropriate model choice for studies of heart tissue injury and wound healing, owing to the larger, more consistent infarcts, while IR enables the study of reperfusion injury. Both are clinically relevant, and the choice of model depends upon the precise pre-clinical research questions to be addressed.

show abstract

Section: Comparing the Utility Of The Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%