4.6 Article

Insulin-induced myocardial protection in isolated ischemic rat hearts requires p38 MAPK phosphorylation of Hsp27

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/ajpheart.00675.2007

关键词

heat shock protein; confocal microscopy; mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Six hours after insulin treatment, hearts express heat shock protein 70 (Hsp70) and have improved contractile function after ischemia-reperfusion injury. In this study we examined hearts 1 h after insulin treatment for contractile function and for expression of Hsp70 and Hsp27. Adult, male Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to groups: 1) sham, 2) control, 3) insulin injected ( 200 mu U/g body wt), 4) heat shock treated (core body temperature, 42 degrees C for 15 min), and 5) heat shock and insulin treated. At 1 h after these treatments, hearts were isolated, equilibrated to Langendorff perfusion for 30 min, and then subjected for 30 min no-flow global ischemia (37 degrees C) followed by 2 h of reperfusion. Insulin-treated hearts had significantly increased contractile function compared with control hearts. At 1 h after insulin treatment, a minimal change in Hsp70 and Hsp27 content were detected. By 3 h after insulin treatment, a significant increase in Hsp70, but not Hsp27, was detected by Western blot analysis. By immunofluorescence, minimal Hsp70 was detected in insulin-treated hearts, whereas Hsp27 was detected in all hearts, indicative of its constitutive expression. Phosphospecific isoforms of Hsp27 were detected in insulin-, heat shock-, and heat shock and insulin- treated hearts. After ischemia and reperfusion, the insulin- treated hearts had significantly elevated levels of phosphorylated Hsp27. Inhibition of p38 MAPK with SB-203580 blocked the insulin- induced phosphorylation of Hsp27 and the improved functional recovery. In conclusion, insulin induces an apparent rapid phosphorylation of Hsp27 that is associated with improved functional recovery after ischemia-reperfusion injury.

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

4.6
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