2 resultados para vasodilation

em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Nitric oxide (NO) is crucial for the microvascular homeostasis, but its role played in the microvascular alterations during sepsis remains controversial. We investigated NO-dependent vasodilation in the skin microcirculation and plasma levels of asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA), a potent endogenous inhibitor of the NO synthases, in a human model of sepsis. In this double-blind, randomized, crossover study, microvascular NO-dependent (local thermal hyperemia) and NO-independent vasodilation (post-occlusive reactive hyperemia) assessed by laser Doppler imaging, plasma levels of ADMA, and l-arginine were measured in seven healthy obese volunteers, immediately before and 4 h after either a i.v. bolus injection of Escherichia coli endotoxin (LPS; 2 ng/kg) or normal saline (placebo) on two different visits at least 2 weeks apart. LPS caused the expected systemic effects, including increases in heart rate (+43%, P < 0.001), cardiac output (+16%, P < 0.01), and rectal temperature (+1.4°C, P < 0.001), without change in arterial blood pressure. LPS affected neither baseline skin blood flow nor post-occlusive reactive hyperemia but decreased the NO-dependent local thermal hyperemia response, l-arginine, and, to a lesser extent, ADMA plasma levels. The changes in NO-dependent vasodilation were not correlated with the corresponding changes in the plasma levels of ADMA, l-arginine, or the l-arginine/ADMA ratio. Our results show for the first time that experimental endotoxemia in humans causes a specific decrease in endothelial NO-dependent vasodilation in the microcirculation, which cannot be explained by a change in ADMA levels. Microvascular NO deficiency might be responsible for the heterogeneity of tissue perfusion observed in sepsis and could be a therapeutic target.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVE: To compare the acute and sustained renal hemodynamic effects on hypertensive patients of 100 mg irbesartan and 20 mg enalapril each once daily. PATIENTS: Twenty patients (aged 35-70 years) with uncomplicated, mild-to-moderate essential hypertension and normal serum creatinine levels completed this study. STUDY DESIGN: After random allocation to treatment (n=10 per group), administration schedule (morning or evening) was determined by further random allocation, with crossover of schedules after 6 weeks' therapy. Treatment and administration assignments were double-blind. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure was monitored before and after 6 and 12 weeks of therapy. Renal hemodynamics were determined on the first day of drug administration and 12 and 24 h after the last dose during chronic treatment. RESULTS: Administration of each antihypertensive agent induced a renal vasodilatation with no significant change in glomerular filtration rate. However, the time course appeared to differ: irbesartan had no significant acute effect 4 h after the first dose, but during chronic administration a renal vasodilatory response was found 12 and 24 h after the dose; enalapril was effective acutely and 12 h after administration, but no residual effect was found 24 h after the dose. Both antihypertensive agents lowered mean ambulatory blood pressure effectively, with no significant difference between treatments or between administration schedules (morning versus evening). CONCLUSIONS: Irbesartan and enalapril have comparable effects on blood pressure and renal hemodynamics in hypertensive patients with normal renal functioning. However, the time profiles of the renal effects appear to differ, which might be important for long-term renoprotective effects.