ArticlePloS one2014
Coronary flow reserve in pregnant rats with increased left ventricular afterload.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Growth Hormone-Releasing Peptide-6 (GHRP-6) Ameliorates Post-Infarct Ventricular Remodeling and Systolic Dysfunction in a Model of Permanent Coronary Ligation.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Role of sex hormones in modulating myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022Article
- Thrombospondin-1 mediates Drp-1 signaling following ischemia reperfusion in the aging heart.FASEB bioAdvances · 2020Article
- Adipose-derived cells improve left ventricular diastolic function and increase microvascular perfusion in advanced age.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedJohansen, Davis [corrected to Johansen, David]
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary flow reserve (CFR) is used as a measure of coronary endothelial function. We investigated the effect of increased afterload on CFR of pregnant and non-pregnant rats.
methodsAfterload increase in Wister rats (both pregnant and non-pregnant) was achieved by the infusion of angiotensin II (Ang II) for ∼10 days or by subjecting them to transverse aortic constriction (TAC) for ∼14 days. Control groups were infused with 0.9% NaCl or had sham surgery, respectively. In pregnant rats, the experiments were performed close to term gestation. Doppler velocity waveforms of the left main coronary artery were recorded using a high resolution ultrasound imaging system (Vevo 770, VisualSonics, Canada) at baseline while the animals were anesthetized with 1.5% inhaled isoflurane, and during maximal coronary dilatation obtained by the inhalation of 3.5% of isoflurane. CFR was calculated as the ratio between the peak coronary flow velocities (CFRpeak) and the velocity-time integrals (CFRVTI) recorded at hyperemia and at baseline.
resultsCFR could be calculated in 60 of 75 (80%) animals. There were no differences in CFR between intervention and control groups irrespective of whether afterload was increased by Ang II or TAC. In the TAC-study CFRpeak (1.54±0.07 vs 1.85±0.17; p = 0.03) was decreased in pregnant compared to non-pregnant shams. When sham animals from both studies were pooled together both CFRpeak (1.42±0.07 vs 1.86±0.16; p = 0.005) as well as CFRVTI (1.45±0.07 vs 1.78±0.12; p = 0.03) were significantly lower in pregnant rats compared to non-pregnant.
conclusionsCFR can be measured non-invasively in rats using Doppler echocardiography and high concentrations of inhaled isoflurane as a coronary vasodilator. In pregnant rats, CFR is reduced close to term. CFR is not affected by increased left ventricular afterload caused by chronic Ang II infusion or TAC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.