Griffin Karen A, Picken Maria M, Bakris George, Bidani Anil K
Department of Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center and Hines VA Hospital, prado@research. hines.med.va.gov.
Pathology, Loyola University Medical Center and Hines VA Hospital, Maywood, IL USA.
J Renin Angiotensin Aldosterone Syst. 2001 Mar;2(1_suppl):S191-S195. doi: 10.1177/14703203010020013301.
The present studies were performed to investigate whether the differences described between the two modalities for interruption of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I) and angiotensin AT 1receptor antagonists (AIIA) result in differences in renoprotective efficacy in the rat remnant kidney model. Male Sprague-Dawley rats with an initial body weight of 225-300 g, underwent 5/6 renal ablation and had radiotransmitters installed for radiotelemetric blood pressure (BP) measurements, owing to the known limitations of periodic tail-cuff BP measurements to adequately reflect ambient BP profiles. After renal ablation surgery, the rats received no treatment (n=10); enalapril (n=11) or candesartan (n=9) after the first week, both administered initially at a dose of 50 mg/l of drinking water (~10 mg/kg). However, the dose of candesartan had to be reduced to 10-25 mg/l in 4/9 rats to avoid excessive hypotension. Both enalapril and candesartan produced significant reductions in average systolic BP during the subsequent approximately six weeks of observations as compared with untreated rats (187±4 mmHg, p<0.001), but candesartan was significantly more effective at these relative doses (121±3 vs. 133±4 mmHg, p<0.05). At approximately seven weeks, serum creatinine and proteinuria were measured before sacrifice for morphologic assessment of percentage glomerulosclerosis (GS). Despite the described differences between ACE-I and AIIA after acute administration, the percentage GS was reduced similarly by enalapril (down to 6.8±2.8%) and candesartan (down to 2.9±1.5%) as compared with untreated rats (37.2±4.3%). Moreover, GS in individual animals paralleled the BP reductions achieved. Proteinuria was reduced in parallel to the decrease in % GS. These data indicate that, at least in the 5/6 renal ablation model, RAAS blockade by either ACE-I or AIIA provides protection by BPdependent rather than BP-independent mechanisms. This may reflect the primarily hypertensive pathogenesis of GS in this model, and the fact that hypertension is also very angiotensin II-dependent in this model. Thus, these data suggest that models other than the 5/6 ablation model may be more appropriate to demonstrate the BP-independent protective effects of RAAS blockade.
本研究旨在探讨肾素 - 血管紧张素 - 醛固酮系统(RAAS)阻断的两种方式,即血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACE - I)和血管紧张素AT1受体拮抗剂(AIIA)之间所描述的差异,是否会导致大鼠残余肾模型中肾脏保护效果的差异。初始体重为225 - 300 g的雄性Sprague - Dawley大鼠接受了5/6肾切除术,并安装了无线电发射器用于遥测血压(BP)测量,这是因为定期尾套法测量血压存在已知局限性,无法充分反映环境血压情况。肾切除术后,大鼠未接受治疗(n = 10);第一周后接受依那普利(n = 11)或坎地沙坦(n = 9)治疗,两者初始剂量均为50 mg/l饮用水(约10 mg/kg)。然而,9只大鼠中有4只不得不将坎地沙坦剂量降至10 - 25 mg/l以避免过度低血压。与未治疗大鼠相比(187±4 mmHg,p < 0.001),在随后约六周的观察期内,依那普利和坎地沙坦均使平均收缩压显著降低,但在这些相对剂量下,坎地沙坦的效果显著更佳(121±3 vs. 133±4 mmHg,p < 0.05)。在大约七周时,处死大鼠前测量血清肌酐和蛋白尿,用于对肾小球硬化百分比(GS)进行形态学评估。尽管急性给药后ACE - I和AIIA之间存在上述差异,但与未治疗大鼠(37.2±4.3%)相比,依那普利(降至6.8±2.8%)和坎地沙坦(降至2.9±1.5%)使GS百分比降低程度相似。此外,个体动物的GS与血压降低情况平行。蛋白尿的减少与GS百分比的降低平行。这些数据表明,至少在5/6肾切除模型中,ACE - I或AIIA阻断RAAS是通过血压依赖性而非血压非依赖性机制提供保护。这可能反映了该模型中GS主要由高血压引起的发病机制,以及该模型中高血压也非常依赖血管紧张素II这一事实。因此,这些数据表明,除5/6肾切除模型外的其他模型可能更适合证明RAAS阻断的血压非依赖性保护作用。