Home > Journals > International Angiology > Past Issues > International Angiology 2004 March;23(1) > International Angiology 2004 March;23(1):72-5

CURRENT ISSUE
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints

INTERNATIONAL ANGIOLOGY

A Journal on Angiology


Official Journal of the International Union of Angiology, the International Union of Phlebology and the Central European Vascular Forum
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 0,899


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  


International Angiology 2004 March;23(1):72-5

language: English

The evaluation of the no-independent vasodilatative effect of iloprost in isolated perfused Guinea pig hind limbs

Brodmann M. 1,2, Lischnig U. 1, Lang B. 1, Lueger A. 1, Pilger E. 2, Stark G. 1,2

1 Division of Pharmacotherapy, Department of Internal Medicine, Karl-Franzens University, Graz, Austria;
2 Division of Angiology, Karl-Franzens University, Graz, Austria


PDF  


Aim. In critical limb ischemia vasodilatators play an important role in the treatment of the disease. Considering that the endothelium is seriously damaged in these patients, we wanted to evaluate if the vasodilatative effect of iloprost does or does not depend on the endothelium by using the model of the isolated perfused guinea pig hind limb.
Methods. A catheter was inserted via the distal aorta and common iliac artery. After stabilization, iloprost was administered at a dosage of 0.1 µM. In a subsequent series of experiments precontraction of the peripheral vascular bed was achieved with 40 mM KCl followed by 0.1 µM iloprost. In a 3rd series of experiments L-NAME (100 µM) was administered after the equilibration period for 30 minutes, followed by 0.1 µM iloprost. In the 4th series of experiments, after the administration of L-NAME (100 µM), KCl (40 mM) was administered to precontract the vascular bed and iloprost 0.1 µM was added.
Results. The administration of iloprost alone and after addition of KCL induced a significant decrease in vascular resistance(-49.6±14.1% [x±SEM, n=7]). The addition of L-NAME did not affect vascular resistance. The consecutive addition of iloprost reduced vascular resistance significantly (-4.2±0.7% [x±SEM, n=7]). After addition of L-NAME 100 µM and precontraction with KCl 40 mM, iloprost once again significantly reduced peripheral vascular resistance (-51.5±14.4% [x±SEM, n=6]). Reduction of peripheral vascular resistance by iloprost was comparable to that without L-NAME.
Conclusion. Our data show that iloprost at a dosage of 0.1 µM achieves a significant reduction in peripheral vascular resistance and that the vasodilatative effect of iloprost is independent of NO. Iloprost therefore seems to be an ideal vasodilatative drug for the treatment of patients with impaired endothelial function.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail