Taylor K, Patten R D, Smith J J, Aronovitz M J, Wight J, Salomon R N, Konstam M A
Department of Medicine, New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1998 May;31(5):654-60. doi: 10.1097/00005344-199805000-00002.
There is mechanistic rationale to suggest differential effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition and angiotensin II type 1 (AT1)-receptor antagonism on ventricular remodeling after myocardial infarction (MI). We compared the effects of ACE inhibition, AT1-receptor antagonism, and their combination on post-MI ventricular remodeling in rats. We induced MI in 62 rats, which then received one of four treatments: (a) placebo; (b) the ACE inhibitor, enalapril; (c) the AT1-receptor antagonist, losartan; and (d) enalapril and losartan in combination. Two weeks after MI, we examined: (a) heart weight (HW)/body weight (BW) ratio; (b) nonmyocyte cellular proliferation in the noninfarct zone by using proliferating cell nuclear antigen staining; and (c) collagen content within the noninfarct zone. Placebo-treated, infarcted rats developed significant increases in HW/BW ratio (p < 0.001), left ventricular (LV) volume (p < 0.01), nonmyocyte cellular proliferation (p < 0.04), and collagen content (p < 0.01) compared with noninfarcted controls. Enalapril, losartan, and combination therapy limited the increase in HW/BW ratio (all p values <0.01 vs. placebo). Enalapril inhibited nonmyocyte proliferation (p < 0.01 vs. placebo), whereas losartan had a smaller effect (p = NS vs. placebo; p < 0.03 vs. enalapril); combined treatment also reduced nonmyocyte cellular proliferation but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08 vs. placebo). Enalapril and combination treatment significantly diminished collagen content (both p values <0.01 vs. placebo), whereas losartan did not. Thus, ACE inhibition and AT1-receptor antagonism equally limited myocardial hypertrophy after MI in rats, but ACE inhibition more effectively prevented nonmyocyte cellular proliferation and collagen deposition in the noninfarcted myocardium. Combination therapy was no more effective than was ACE inhibition alone. These data suggest that the myocyte hypertrophic response after MI is strongly influenced by activation of the AT1 receptor, whereas nonmyocyte cellular proliferation and collagen deposition result, in part, from mechanisms separate from AT1-receptor activation.
有机制依据表明,血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)抑制和血管紧张素II 1型(AT1)受体拮抗对心肌梗死(MI)后心室重构有不同影响。我们比较了ACE抑制、AT1受体拮抗及其联合应用对大鼠MI后心室重构的影响。我们在62只大鼠中诱导MI,然后将其分为四组进行治疗:(a)安慰剂;(b)ACE抑制剂依那普利;(c)AT1受体拮抗剂氯沙坦;(d)依那普利和氯沙坦联合应用。MI后两周,我们检测了:(a)心脏重量(HW)/体重(BW)比值;(b)通过增殖细胞核抗原染色检测非梗死区非心肌细胞的增殖;(c)非梗死区的胶原含量。与未梗死的对照组相比,接受安慰剂治疗的梗死大鼠的HW/BW比值(p < 0.001)、左心室(LV)容积(p < 0.01)、非心肌细胞增殖(p < 0.04)和胶原含量(p < 0.01)均显著增加。依那普利、氯沙坦和联合治疗均限制了HW/BW比值的增加(与安慰剂相比,所有p值均<0.01)。依那普利抑制非心肌细胞增殖(与安慰剂相比,p < 0.01),而氯沙坦的作用较小(与安慰剂相比,p =无显著性差异;与依那普利相比,p < 0.03);联合治疗也减少了非心肌细胞增殖,但未达到统计学显著性(与安慰剂相比,p = 0.08)。依那普利和联合治疗均显著降低了胶原含量(与安慰剂相比,p值均<0.01),而氯沙坦则没有。因此,ACE抑制和AT1受体拮抗在同等程度上限制了大鼠MI后的心肌肥大,但ACE抑制更有效地预防了非梗死心肌中的非心肌细胞增殖和胶原沉积。联合治疗并不比单独使用ACE抑制更有效。这些数据表明,MI后心肌细胞的肥大反应受AT1受体激活的强烈影响,而非心肌细胞增殖和胶原沉积部分源于与AT1受体激活无关的机制。