Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 153, Issue 6, pp 856–858 | Cite as

Inotropic Effects of Gaseous Transmitters in Isolated Rat Heart Preparation

  • M. V. Porokhya
  • D. V. Abramochkin
  • A. A. Abramov
  • V. S. Kuzmin
  • G. S. Sukhova
Article
First Online:
Received:

We studied the effects of carbon monoxide and sodium hydrosulfide, hydrogen sulfide donor, on contractile activity of the left ventricle in Langendorf-perfused isolated rat heart. Carbon monoxide 5×10−5 M significantly accelerated sinus rhythm and left-ventricular pressure wave growth and decay. To the contrary, negative inotropic and chronotropic effects were observed at higher concentrations of carbon monoxide (10−4, 3×10−4 M). Sodium hydrosulfide (10−4-4×10−4 M) decreased all the parameters of left-ventricular contractive activity and reduced contraction rate. Carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide, which together with nitrogen oxide are qualified as a new class of gaseous signal compounds, may substantially modulate pumping function of the heart.

Key Words

carbon monoxide hydrogen sulfide retrograde perfusion inotropic effect chronotropic effect 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G. F. Sitdikova and A. L. Zefirova, Priroda, No. 9, 29-37 (2010).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. F. Sitdikova and A. L. Zefirova, Ros. Fiziol. Zh., 97, No. 7, 872-882 (2006).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. V. Abramochkin, L. S. Moiseenko, and V. S. Kuzmin, Bull. Exp. Biol. Med., 147, No. 6, 683-686 (2009).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. Cobb, K. D. Ward, W. Maziak, et al., Am. J. Health Behav., 34, No. 3, 275-285 (2010).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Kojda and K. Kottenberg, Cardiovasc. Res., 41, No. 3, 514-523 (1999).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Li, A. Hsu, and P. K. Moore, Pharmacol. Ther., 123, No. 3, 386-400 (2009).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Liu, D. Song, and S. S. Lee, Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol., 280, No. 1, G68-G74 (2001).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Lochner, E. Marais, S. Genade, and J. A. Moolman, Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol., 279, No. 6, 2752-2765 (2000).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. D. Musameh, B. J. Fuller, B. E. Mann, et al., Br. J. Pharmacol., 149, No. 8, 1104-1112 (2006).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. T. Pan, Z. N. Feng, S. W. Lee, et al., J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol., 40, No. 1, 119-130 (2006).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. Tamargo, R. Caballero, R. Gomez, and E. Delpon, Cardiovasc. Res., 87, No. 4, 593-600 (2010).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    K. Uemura, S. Adachi-Akahane, K. Shintani-Ishida, and K. Yoshida, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 334, No. 2, 661-668 (2005).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Wu and R. Wang, Pharmacol. Rev., 57, No. 8, 585-630 (2005).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Zufall and T. Leinders-Zufall, J. Neurosci., 17, No. 8, 2703-2712 (1997).PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. V. Porokhya
    • 1
  • D. V. Abramochkin
    • 1
  • A. A. Abramov
    • 1
  • V. S. Kuzmin
    • 1
  • G. S. Sukhova
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Human and Animal PhysiologyM.V.Lomonosov Moscow State UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations