ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2015
Novel cardioprotective strategy combining three different preconditioning methods to prevent ischemia/reperfusion injury in aged hearts in an improved rabbit model.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel Strategies to Improve the Cardioprotective Effects of Cardioplegia.Current cardiology reviews · 2024Review
- S100 proteins in cardiovascular diseases.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2023Review
- Scutellarin Prevents Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD) and Hyperlipidemia via PI3K/AKT-Dependent Activation of Nuclear Factor (Erythroid-Derived 2)-Like 2 (Nrf2) in Rats.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2017Article
- Roles of Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress in NECA-Induced Cardioprotection against Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2017Article
- Nanosecond pulsed platelet-rich plasma (nsPRP) improves mechanical and electrical cardiac function following myocardial reperfusion injury.Physiological reports · 2016Article
- Vitexin exerts cardioprotective effect on chronic myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury in rats via inhibiting myocardial apoptosis and lipid peroxidation.American journal of translational research · 2016Article
- Acute Stress Decreases but Chronic Stress Increases Myocardial Sensitivity to Ischemic Injury in Rodents.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of ischemic preconditioning (IPC) to protect the myocardium is usually not effective in elderly patients. The aim of the present study was to design new methods to achieve enhanced myocardial protection, based on the differential role of endogenous adenosine (ADO) and ADO receptors (ARs) in the effects of IPC on young and old animals. An improved New Zealand white rabbit model of ischemia/reperfusion was established based on the Langendorff model. Adult or elderly rabbit hearts, with or without exposure to IPC, were used in order to assess the roles of ADO and ARs in the different effects of IPC. Different protective methods were designed based on a combination of endogenous and exogenous interventions. Cardiac function, as well as biochemical, histopathological and apoptotic indices, were measured in the different intervention groups. The improved Langendorff model was stable, reliable and suitable for the undertaking of the experiments. The ADO levels in the aged rabbit hearts pre- and post-IPC were lower than those in the adult hearts, indicating that ADO levels may be an endogenous factor influencing IPC. A new protection strategy combining ADO-enhanced IPC, A
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.