GLPwatch

Combination therapy with remote ischaemic conditioning and insulin or exenatide enhances infarct size limitation in pigs.

Cardiovasc Res · 2015

Last updated 2026-05-28

In a pig study, combining remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) with either exenatide or glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) reduced heart attack damage more than RIC alone. Infarct size—the portion of heart tissue damaged—was 59% with no treatment, 37% with one treatment, and 21% with two treatments after 2 hours of blood flow restoration. The combination of RIC with either drug worked better than either treatment alone.

AI summary of the abstract below.

JournalCardiovasc Res, 2015
Citations47
Relative citation ratio1.68
NIH percentile68
Molecules exenatide
Conditions studied Type 2 Diabetes

Abstract

AIMS: Remote ischaemic conditioning (RIC) has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients. Our objective was to investigate whether the combination of RIC with either exenatide or glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) is more effective than RIC alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: Pigs were submitted to 40 min of coronary occlusion followed by reperfusion, and received (i) no treatment, (ii) one of the following treatments: RIC (5 min ischemia/5 min reperfusion × 4), GIK, or exenatide (at doses reducing infarct size in clinical trials), or (iii) a combination of two of these treatments (RIC + GIK or RIC + exenatide). After 5 min of reperfusion (n = 4/group), prominent phosphorylation of Akt and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) was observed, both in control and reperfused myocardium, in animals receiving GIK, and mitochondria from these hearts showed reduced ADP-stimulated respiration. (1)H NMR-based metabonomics disclosed a shift towards increased glycolysis in GIK and exenatide groups. In contrast, oxidative stress (myocardial nitrotyrosine levels) and eNOS uncoupling were significantly reduced only by RIC. In additional experiments (n = 7-10/group), ANOVA demonstrated a significant effect of the number of treatments after 2 h of reperfusion on infarct size (triphenyltetrazolium, % of the area at risk; 59.21 ± 3.34, 36.64 ± 3.03, and 21.04 ± 2.38% for none, one, and two treatments, respectively), and significant differences between one and two treatments (P = 0.004) but not among individual treatments or between RIC + GIK and RIC + exenatide. CONCLUSIONS: GIK and exenatide activate cardioprotective pathways different from those of RIC, and have additive effects with RIC on infarct size reduction in pigs.

Verbatim abstract via PubMed 26045476 ↗

Related research