Practical guidelines for rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection

The potential for ischemic preconditioning to reduce infarct size was first recognized more than 30 years ago. Despite extension of the concept to ischemic postconditioning and remote ischemic conditioning and literally thousands of experimental studies in various species and models which identified a multitude of signaling steps, so far there is only a single and very recent study, which has unequivocally translated cardioprotection to improved clinical outcome as the primary endpoint in patients. Many potential reasons for this disappointing lack of clinical translation of cardioprotection have been proposed, including lack of rigor and reproducibility in preclinical studies, and poor design and conduct of clinical trials. There is, however, universal agreement that robust preclinical data are a mandatory prerequisite to initiate a meaningful clinical trial. In this context, it is disconcerting that the CAESAR consortium (Consortium for preclinicAl assESsment of cARdioprotective therapies) in a highly standardized multi-center approach of preclinical studies identified only ischemic preconditioning, but not nitrite or sildenafil, when given as adjunct to reperfusion, to reduce infarct size. However, ischemic preconditioning—due to its very nature—can only be used in elective interventions, and not in acute myocardial infarction. Therefore, better strategies to identify robust and reproducible strategies of cardioprotection, which can subsequently be tested in clinical trials must be developed. We refer to the recent guidelines for experimental models of myocardial ischemia and infarction, and aim to provide now practical guidelines to ensure rigor and reproducibility in preclinical and clinical studies on cardioprotection. In line with the above guideline, we define rigor as standardized state-of-the-art design, conduct and reporting of a study, which is then a prerequisite for reproducibility, i.e. replication of results by another laboratory when performing exactly the same experiment

Acute administration of nicotine induces transient elevation of blood pressure and increases myocardial infarct size in rats

AimsWe investigated the acute effects of nicotine on myocardial infarct size, no reflow, hemodynamics and cardiac function in an acute myocardial ischemia and reperfusion infarction rat model.Main methodsFemale Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 23/group) received an intravenous loading dose of nicotine at 2.0 μg/kg/min or saline control for 30 min before starting coronary artery occlusion, then followed by a maintenance dose 0.35 μg/kg/min of nicotine to the end of 30 min occlusion and 3 h reperfusion.Key findingsAt baseline, there was no difference in systolic blood pressure (BP in mmHg) (nicotine, 69.0 ± 2.7; control, 69.3 ± 4.4; p = NS) or diastolic BP (nicotine, 45.7 ± 3.2; control, 48.2 ± 4.2; p = NS) between groups. Nicotine administration initially increased systolic BP (nicotine, 97.0 ± 8.6; control, 69.2 ± 3.3, p < 0.0001) and diastolic BP (nicotine, 65.6 ± 6.4; control, 47.4 ± 3.1, p = 0.0003) at 10 min after starting injection of the loading dose; BP dropped to control levels in both groups at 30 min. During occlusion and reperfusion, the BP and heart rate were not altered by nicotine. Nicotine significantly increased myocardial infarct size as a percentage of the ischemic risk zone compared to the controls (nicotine, 54.9 ± 1.9; control, 48.6 ± 2.7, p < 0.05), but nicotine did not affect the no-reflow size and heart function.SignificanceWhile acute nicotine only transiently elevated blood pressure, it did not affect hemodynamic parameters during coronary artery occlusion. Nicotine increased myocardial infarct size, suggesting that the increase in infarct size was not simply due to an increase in oxygen demand due to altered afterload, heart rate, or contractility, but may have been due to a more direct effect on the myocardium