Khandoudi N, Percevault-Albadine J, Bril A
SmithKline Beecham Laboratoires Pharmaceutiques, Saint-Grégoire, France.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1998 Sep;32(3):443-51. doi: 10.1097/00005344-199809000-00015.
The effects of carvedilol, a multiple-action neurohormonal antagonist, and metoprolol, a highly selective beta1 antagonist, were compared on postischemic contractile recovery and contracture. Isolated rabbit hearts were aerobically perfused for 45 min and subjected to zero-flow normothermic ischemia for 30 or 60 min followed by reperfusion for 30 min. Carvedilol and metoprolol were added to the perfusion solution 10 min before inducing ischemia and were maintained in the perfusate throughout reperfusion. Left ventricular developed pressure (LVDP) and left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) were assessed with an intraventricular balloon. Because the volume of the balloon was held constant, an increase in LVEDP reflected an increase in diastolic chamber stiffness or "contracture." After 30 min of ischemia, the carvedilol-treated hearts exhibited a significantly better cardiac function than did control or metoprolol-treated hearts. At the end of reperfusion, the control group LVDP recovered to 21.4+/-9.9% of the preischemic value. With 0.03, 0.1, and 0.3 microM metoprolol, LVDP recovered to 33.2+/-13.6%, 41.7+/-13.0%, and 48.8+/-13.3% of initial developed pressure, respectively. In the carvedilol group, a greater recovery of LVDP was obtained at 0.03, 0.1, and 0.3 microM: 64.0+/-2.5%, 60.4+/-6.3%, and 68.0+/-2.0% of preischemic values, respectively (p < 0.05 vs. controls). Within the first 5 min of reperfusion, LVEDP increased to 70.3+/-2.7 mm Hg in control hearts, indicating a pronounced contracture, whereas metoprolol reduced LVEDP when given at high concentration, 0.3 microM (41.9+/-10.7 mm Hg). Carvedilol, even at the lowest concentration, 0.03 microM, almost completely inhibited the postischemic contracture (16.5+/-4.0 mm Hg; p < 0.05 vs. control and metoprolol). The cardioprotection provided by carvedilol also is observed in hearts subjected to more severe ischemic periods. After 60 min of ischemia, control hearts failed to restore LVDP function; in the metoprolol group, ventricular function recovered to only 4.6+/-3.1%, whereas carvedilol-treated hearts exhibited 23.6+/-1.9% of preischemic values at the end of reperfusion. In addition, carvedilol induced a reduction in ischemic contracture: control, 36.7+/-3 mm Hg; metoprolol, 38.7+/-3.7 mm Hg; and carvedilol, 15.7+/-8.4 mm Hg at 50 min of ischemia. Similarly, carvedilol reduced contracture during the reperfusion compared with metoprolol and control groups (83.2+/-3.4 mm Hg, 106.9+/-3.3 mm Hg, and 107.6+/-4.1 mm Hg, respectively). These data clearly demonstrate that carvedilol was markedly more effective than metoprolol to protect systolic function after ischemia and to reduce postischemic contracture.
比较了多效神经激素拮抗剂卡维地洛和高选择性β1拮抗剂美托洛尔对缺血后收缩恢复和挛缩的影响。将离体兔心进行有氧灌注45分钟,然后进行零流量常温缺血30或60分钟,随后再灌注30分钟。在诱导缺血前10分钟将卡维地洛和美托洛尔加入灌注液中,并在整个再灌注过程中维持在灌注液中。用心室内球囊评估左心室舒张末压(LVDP)和左心室舒张末压(LVEDP)。由于球囊体积保持恒定,LVEDP的增加反映了舒张期心室僵硬度或“挛缩”的增加。缺血30分钟后,卡维地洛治疗的心脏表现出比对照组或美托洛尔治疗的心脏明显更好的心脏功能。再灌注结束时,对照组LVDP恢复到缺血前值的21.4±9.9%。使用0.03、0.1和0.3微摩尔美托洛尔时,LVDP分别恢复到初始舒张末压的33.2±13.6%、41.7±13.0%和48.8±13.3%。在卡维地洛组中,使用0.03、0.1和0.3微摩尔时LVDP恢复程度更高:分别为缺血前值的64.0±2.5%、60.4±6.3%和68.0±2.0%(与对照组相比,p<0.05)。在再灌注的前5分钟内,对照组心脏的LVEDP增加到70.3±2.7毫米汞柱,表明明显的挛缩,而高浓度(0.3微摩尔)给予美托洛尔时可降低LVEDP(41.9±10.7毫米汞柱)。卡维地洛即使在最低浓度(0.03微摩尔)时,也几乎完全抑制缺血后挛缩(16.5±4.0毫米汞柱;与对照组和美托洛尔相比,p<0.05)。在经历更严重缺血期的心脏中也观察到卡维地洛提供的心脏保护作用。缺血60分钟后,对照组心脏未能恢复LVDP功能;在美托洛尔组中,心室功能仅恢复到4.6±3.1%,而卡维地洛治疗的心脏在再灌注结束时表现出缺血前值的23.6±1.9%。此外,卡维地洛可诱导缺血挛缩降低:缺血50分钟时,对照组为36.7±3毫米汞柱,美托洛尔为38.7±3.7毫米汞柱,卡维地洛为15.7±8.4毫米汞柱。同样,与美托洛尔组和对照组相比,卡维地洛在再灌注期间降低了挛缩(分别为83.2±3.4毫米汞柱、106.9±3.3毫米汞柱和107.6±4.1毫米汞柱)。这些数据清楚地表明,卡维地洛在保护缺血后收缩功能和减少缺血后挛缩方面明显比美托洛尔更有效。