Dataset Information

Mitochondrial nitroalkene formation and mild uncoupling in ischaemic preconditioning: implications for cardioprotection.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Both mitochondria and nitric oxide (NO*) contribute to cardioprotection by ischaemic preconditioning (IPC). IPC causes mild uncoupling of mitochondria via uncoupling proteins (UCPs) and the adenine nucleotide translocase (ANT), and mild uncoupling per se is cardioprotective. Although electrophilic lipids are known to activate mitochondrial uncoupling, the role of such species in IPC-induced uncoupling and cardioprotection is unclear. We hypothesized that endogenous formation of NO*-derived electrophilic lipids (nitroalkenes such as nitro-linoleate, LNO2) during IPC may stimulate mitochondrial uncoupling via post-translational modification of UCPs and ANT, thus affording cardioprotection.

Methods

Hearts from male Sprague-Dawley rats were Langendorff-perfused and subjected to IPC. Nitroalkene formation was measured by HPLC-ESI-MS/MS. The effects of exogenous LNO2 and biotin-tagged LNO2 on isolated heart mitochondria and cardiomyocytes were also investigated.

Results

Nitroalkenes including LNO2 were endogenously generated in mitochondria of IPC hearts. Synthetic LNO2 (<1 microM) activated mild uncoupling, an effect blocked by UCP and ANT inhibitors. LNO2 (<1 microM) also protected cardiomyocytes against simulated ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Biotinylated LNO2 covalently modified ANT thiols and possibly UCP-2. No effects of LNO2 were attributable to NO* release, cGMP signalling, mitochondrial KATP channels, or protective kinase signalling.

Conclusion

Components of a novel signalling pathway are inferred, wherein nitroalkenes formed by IPC-stimulated nitration reactions may induce mild mitochondrial uncoupling via post-translational modification of ANT and UCP-2, subsequently conferring resistance to ischaemia-reperfusion injury.

SUBMITTER: Nadtochiy SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2675927 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsAnthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity (AIC) is a serious adverse effect among cancer patients. A central mechanism of AIC is irreversible mitochondrial damage. Despite major efforts, there are currently no effective therapies able to prevent AIC.Methods and resultsForty Large-White pigs were included. In Study 1, 20 pigs were randomized 1:1 to remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC, 3 cycles of 5 min leg ischaemia followed by 5 min reperfusion) or no pretreatment. RIPC was performed immediately before each intracoronary doxorubicin injections (0.45 mg/kg) given at Weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8. A group of 10 pigs with no exposure to doxorubicin served as healthy controls. Pigs underwent serial cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) exams at baseline and at Weeks 6, 8, 12, and 16, being sacrifice after that. In Study 2, 10 new pigs received 3 doxorubicin injections (with/out preceding RIPC) and were sacrificed at week 6. In Study 1, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) depression was blunted animals receiving RIPC before doxorubicin (RIPC-Doxo), which had a significantly higher LVEF at Week 16 than doxorubicin treated pigs that received no pretreatment (Untreated-Doxo) (41.5 ± 9.1% vs. 32.5 ± 8.7%, P = 0.04). It was mainly due to conserved regional contractile function. In Study 2, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) at Week 6 showed fragmented mitochondria with severe morphological abnormalities in Untreated-Doxo pigs, together with upregulation of fission and autophagy proteins. At the end of the 16-week Study 1 protocol, TEM revealed overt mitochondrial fragmentation with structural fragmentation in Untreated-Doxo pigs, whereas interstitial fibrosis was less severe in RIPC+Doxo pigs.ConclusionIn a translatable large-animal model of AIC, RIPC applied immediately before each doxorubicin injection resulted in preserved cardiac contractility with significantly higher long-term LVEF and less cardiac fibrosis. RIPC prevented mitochondrial fragmentation and dysregulated autophagy from AIC early stages. RIPC is a promising intervention for testing in clinical trials in AIC.

Project description:BackgroundDespite advances in perioperative care, elective major vascular surgical procedures still carry a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Remote ischaemic preconditioning (RIPC) is the temporary blocking of blood flow to vascular beds remote from those targeted by surgery. It has the potential to provide local tissue protection from further prolonged periods of ischaemia. However, the efficacy and safety of RIPC in people undergoing major vascular surgery remain unknown. This is an update of a review published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of RIPC versus no RIPC in people undergoing elective major vascular and endovascular surgery.Search methodsThe Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov to 1 April 2022.Selection criteriaWe included all randomised controlled trials that evaluated the role of RIPC in reducing perioperative mortality and morbidities in people undergoing elective major vascular or endovascular surgery.Data collection and analysisWe collected data on the characteristics of the trial, methodological quality, and the remote ischaemic preconditioning stimulus used. Our primary outcome was perioperative mortality, and secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, renal impairment, stroke, hospital stay, limb loss, and operating time or total anaesthetic time. We analysed the data using random-effects models. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) based on an intention-to-treat analysis. In addition, we used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.Main resultsWe included 14 trials which randomised a total of 1295 participants (age range: 64.5 to 76 years; 84% male; study periods ranged from 2003 to 2019). In general, the included studies were at low to unclear risk of bias for most risk of bias domains. The certainty of evidence of main outcomes was moderate due to imprecision of results, moderate heterogeneity, or possible publication bias. We found that RIPC made no clear difference in perioperative mortality compared with no RIPC (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.40; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 965 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Similarly, we found no clear difference between the two groups for myocardial infarction (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.40; I2 = 7%; 11 studies, 1001 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), renal impairment (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.86; I2 = 40%; 12 studies, 1054 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), stroke (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 392 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), limb loss (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.05 to 10.61; I2 = 32%; 3 studies, 322 participants; low-certainty evidence), hospital stay (MD -0.94 day, 95% CI -1.95 to 0.07; I2 = 17%; 7 studies, 569 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and operating time or total anaesthetic time (MD 5.76 minutes, 95% CI -3.25 to 14.76; I2 = 44%; 10 studies, 803 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, compared with no RIPC, RIPC probably leads to little or no difference in perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, renal impairment, stroke, hospital stay, and operating time, and may lead to little or no difference in limb loss in people undergoing elective major vascular and endovascular surgery. Adequately powered and designed randomised studies are needed, focusing in particular on the clinical endpoints and patient-centred outcomes.