4.5 Article

Activation of endothelial BKCa channels causes pulmonary vasodilation

期刊

VASCULAR PHARMACOLOGY
卷 53, 期 3-4, 页码 122-129

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.vph.2010.05.001

关键词

Large-conductance calcium activated potassium channel; Endothelial cells; Lung; Vasodilation

资金

  1. Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Office of Research and Development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Large-conductance Ca2+-activated K+ (BKCa) channels cause hyperpolarization and can regulate vascular tone. In this study, we evaluated the effect of endothelial BKCa activation on pulmonary vascular tone. Methods: The presence of BKCa channels in lung microvascular endothelial cells (LMVEC) and rat lung tissue was confirmed by RT-PCR, immunoblotting and immunohistochemistry. Isolated pulmonary artery (PA) rings and isolated ventilated-perfused rat lungs were used to assay the effects of BKCa channel activation on endothelium-dependent vasodilation. Results: Immunoblotting and RT-PCR revealed the presence of BKCa channel alpha- and beta(4)-subunits in LMVEC. Immunohistochemical staining showed BKCa channel alpha-subunit expression in vascular endothelium in rat lungs. In arterial ring studies, BKCa channel activation by NS1619 enhanced endothelium-dependent vasodilation that was attenuated by tetraethylammonium and iberiotoxin. In addition, activation of BKCa channels by C-type natriuretic peptide caused endothelial-dependent vasodilation that was blocked by iberiotoxin, L-NAME, and lanthanum. Furthermore. BKCa activation by NS1619 caused a dose-dependent reduction in PA pressures that was attenuated by L-NAME. In vitro, BKCa channel activation in LMVEC caused hyperpolarization and increased NO production. Conclusions: Pulmonary endothelium expresses BKCa channels. Activation of endothelial BKCa channels causes hyperpolarization and NO mediated endothelium-dependent vasodilation in micro- and macrovasculature in the lung. Published by Elsevier Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据