26 research outputs found

    Involvement of PPAR-Ī³ in the neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects of angiotensin type 1 receptor inhibition: effects of the receptor antagonist telmisartan and receptor deletion in a mouse MPTP model of Parkinson's disease

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Several recent studies have shown that angiotensin type 1 receptor (AT1) antagonists such as candesartan inhibit the microglial inflammatory response and dopaminergic cell loss in animal models of Parkinson's disease. However, the mechanisms involved in the neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects of AT1 blockers in the brain have not been clarified. A number of studies have reported that AT1 blockers activate peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR Ī³). PPAR-Ī³ activation inhibits inflammation, and may be responsible for neuroprotective effects, independently of AT1 blocking actions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We have investigated whether oral treatment with telmisartan (the most potent PPAR-Ī³ activator among AT1 blockers) provides neuroprotection against dopaminergic cell death and neuroinflammation, and the possible role of PPAR-Ī³ activation in any such neuroprotection. We used a mouse model of parkinsonism induced by the dopaminergic neurotoxin 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) and co-administration of the PPAR-Ī³ antagonist GW9662 to study the role of PPAR-Ī³ activation. In addition, we used AT1a-null mice lesioned with MPTP to study whether deletion of AT1 in the absence of any pharmacological effect of AT1 blockers provides neuroprotection, and investigated whether PPAR-Ī³ activation may also be involved in any such effect of AT1 deletion by co-administration of the PPAR-Ī³ antagonist GW9662.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We observed that telmisartan protects mouse dopaminergic neurons and inhibits the microglial response induced by administration of MPTP. The protective effects of telmisartan on dopaminergic cell death and microglial activation were inhibited by co-administration of GW9662. Dopaminergic cell death and microglial activation were significantly lower in AT1a-null mice treated with MPTP than in mice not subjected to AT1a deletion. Interestingly, the protective effects of AT1 deletion were also inhibited by co-administration of GW9662.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results suggest that telmisartan provides effective neuroprotection against dopaminergic cell death and that the neuroprotective effect is mediated by PPAR-Ī³ activation. However, the results in AT1-deficient mice show that blockage of AT1, unrelated to the pharmacological properties of AT1 blockers, also protects against dopaminergic cell death and neuroinflammation. Furthermore, the results show that PPAR-Ī³ activation is involved in the anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects of AT1 deletion.</p

    Transvenous or Subcutaneous ICD ā€” Similar but Different

    No full text

    Procedural Patterns and Safety of Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: Findings From Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation.

    No full text
    BackgroundCatheter ablation is an increasingly used treatment for symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF). However, there are limited prospective, nationwide data on patient selection and procedural characteristics. This study describes patient characteristics, techniques, treatment patterns, and safety outcomes of patients undergoing AF ablation.MethodsA total of 3139 patients undergoing AF ablation between 2016 and 2018 in the Get With The Guidelines-Atrial Fibrillation registry from 24 US centers were included. Patient demographics, medical history, procedural details, and complications were abstracted. Differences between paroxysmal and patients with persistent AF were compared using Pearson Ļ‡2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.ResultsPatients undergoing AF ablation were predominantly male (63.9%) and White (93.2%) with a median age of 65. Hypertension was the most common comorbidity (67.6%), and patients with persistent AF had more comorbidities than patients with paroxysmal AF. Drug refractory, paroxysmal AF was the most common ablation indication (class I, 53.6%) followed by drug refractory, persistent AF (class I, 41.8%). Radiofrequency ablation with contact force sensing was the most common ablation modality (70.5%); 23.7% of patients underwent cryoballoon ablation. Pulmonary vein isolation was performed in 94.6% of de novo ablations; the most common adjunctive lesions included left atrial roof or posterior/inferior lines, and cavotricuspid isthmus ablation. Complications were uncommon (5.1%) and were life-threatening in 0.7% of cases.ConclusionsMore than 98% of AF ablations among participating sites are performed for class I or class IIA indications. Contact force-guided radiofrequency ablation is the dominant technique and pulmonary vein isolation the principal lesion set. In-hospital complications are uncommon and rarely life-threatening

    Guidance for Cardiac Electrophysiology During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic from the Heart Rhythm Society COVID-19 Task Force; Electrophysiology Section of the American College of Cardiology; and the Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology, American Heart Association.

    No full text
    Covid-19 is a global pandemic that is wreaking havoc with the health and economy of much of human civilization. Electrophysiologists have been impacted personally and professionally by this global catastrophe. In this joint document from representatives of the HRS, ACC and AHA we identify the potential risks of exposure to patients, allied health care staff, industry representatives and hospital administrators. We describe the impact of COVID-19 on cardiac arrhythmias and methods of triage based on acuity and patient comorbidities. We provide guidance for managing invasive and non-invasive electrophysiology procedures, clinic visits and cardiac device interrogations. We discuss resource conservation and the role of tele-medicine in remote patient care along with management strategies for affected patients

    Systematic Review for the 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

    No full text
    Objectiveā€” To review the literature systematically and perform meta-analyses to address these questions: 1) Is there evidence that self-measured blood pressure (BP) without other augmentation is superior to office-based measurement of BP for achieving better BP control or for preventing adverse clinical outcomes that are related to elevated BP? 2) What is the optimal target for BP lowering during antihypertensive therapy in adults? 3) In adults with hypertension, how do various antihypertensive drug classes differ in their benefits and harms compared with each other as first-line therapy? Methodsā€” Electronic literature searches were performed by Doctor Evidence, a global medical evidence software and services company, across PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to 2015 using key words and relevant subject headings for randomized controlled trials that met eligibility criteria defined for each question. We performed analyses using traditional frequentist statistical and Bayesian approaches, including random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses. Resultsā€” Our results suggest that: 1) There is a modest but significant improvement in systolic BP in randomized controlled trials of self-measured BP versus usual care at 6 but not 12 months, and for selected patients and their providers self-measured BP may be a helpful adjunct to routine office care. 2) systolic BP lowering to a target of <130 mm Hg may reduce the risk of several important outcomes including risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and major cardiovascular events. No class of medications (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, or beta blockers) was significantly better than thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics as a first-line therapy for any outcome
    corecore