Haller Paul M, Jäger Bernhard, Piackova Edita, Sztulman Larissa, Wegberger Claudia, Wojta Johann, Gyöngyösi Mariann, Kiss Attila, Podesser Bruno K, Spittler Andreas, Huber Kurt
3rd Department of Medicine, Cardiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Wilhelminenhospital, 1160 Vienna, Austria.
Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Cardiovascular Research, 1160 Vienna, Austria.
Biomedicines. 2020 Jul 16;8(7):218. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines8070218.
(1) Background: Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have been recognized as a cellular communication tool with cardioprotective properties; however, it is unknown whether cardioprotection by remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) involves EVs. (2) Methods: We randomized patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to additionally receive a protocol of RIC or a sham-intervention. Blood was taken before and immediately, 24 h, four days and one month after PCI. Additionally, we investigated EVs from healthy volunteers undergoing RIC. EVs were characterized by a high-sensitive flow cytometer (Beckman Coulter Cytoflex S, Krefeld, Germany). (3) Results: We analyzed 32 patients (16 RIC, 16 control) and five healthy volunteers. We investigated platelet-, endothelial-, leukocyte-, monocyte- and granulocyte-derived EVs and their pro-thrombotic sub-populations expressing superficial phosphatidylserine (PS). We did not observe a significant effect of RIC on the numbers of circulating EVs, although granulocyte-derived EVs were significantly higher in the RIC group. In line, RIC had not impact on EVs in healthy volunteers. Additionally, we observed changes of PS/PEV, EEVs and PS/CD15 EVs irrespective of RIC with time following STEMI. 4) Conclusion: We provide further insights into the course of different circulating EVs during the acute and sub-acute phases of STEMI. With respect to the investigated EV populations, RIC seems to have no effect, with only minor differences found for granulocyte EVs.
(1) 背景:细胞外囊泡(EVs)已被公认为是一种具有心脏保护特性的细胞通讯工具;然而,远程缺血预处理(RIC)的心脏保护作用是否涉及细胞外囊泡尚不清楚。(2) 方法:我们将接受直接经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者随机分组,使其额外接受RIC方案或假干预。在PCI术前、术毕即刻、术后24小时、4天和1个月采集血液。此外,我们研究了接受RIC的健康志愿者的细胞外囊泡。使用高灵敏度流式细胞仪(德国克雷费尔德的贝克曼库尔特Cytoflex S)对细胞外囊泡进行表征。(3) 结果:我们分析了32例患者(16例接受RIC,16例为对照组)和5名健康志愿者。我们研究了血小板、内皮细胞、白细胞、单核细胞和粒细胞来源的细胞外囊泡及其表达表面磷脂酰丝氨酸(PS)的促血栓形成亚群。尽管RIC组中粒细胞来源的细胞外囊泡显著增多,但我们未观察到RIC对循环细胞外囊泡数量有显著影响。同样,RIC对健康志愿者的细胞外囊泡也没有影响。此外,我们观察到STEMI后,无论是否进行RIC,PS/PEV、EEVs和PS/CD15 EVs均随时间发生变化。(4) 结论:我们对STEMI急性和亚急性期不同循环细胞外囊泡的变化过程有了进一步认识。就所研究的细胞外囊泡群体而言,RIC似乎没有作用,仅在粒细胞细胞外囊泡上发现了微小差异。