Advertisement






Click here for more guidelines.
CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home
     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 2002; 40:1495-1505
© 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Erratum (v42,p590)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rademaker, M. T.
Right arrow Articles by Vale, W. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rademaker, M. T.
Right arrow Articles by Vale, W. W.

Beneficial hemodynamic, endocrine, and renal effects of urocortin in experimental heart failure

Comparison with normal sheep

Miriam T. Rademaker, PhD*,*, Christopher J. Charles, PhD*, Eric A. Espiner, MD, FRACP*, Steve Fisher, NZCS, DipMLT*, Christopher M. Frampton, PhD*, Carl M. J. Kirkpatrick, Bpharm*, John G. Lainchbury, MD, FRACP*, M. Gary Nicholls, MD, FRACP, FACC*, A. Mark Richards, MD, PhD, FRACP* and Wylie W. Vale, PhD{dagger}

* Christchurch Cardioendocrine Research Group, Christchurch School of Medicine, Christchurch, New Zealand
{dagger} Clayton Foundation Laboratories for Peptide Biology, The Salk Institute, La Jolla, California, USA



View larger version (37K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 1 Mean ± SEM hemodynamic responses to incremental boluses of urocortin and a vehicle control in eight normal sheep (left panel) and eight heart failure sheep (right panel). Baseline data points represent the mean of four samples taken in the hour preceding treatment. Significant differences (compared with time-matched control) are shown by: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; {dagger}p < 0.001.

 


View larger version (34K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 2 Mean ± SEM plasma urocortin, arginine vasopressin, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), and cortisol responses to incremental boluses of urocortin and a vehicle control in eight normal sheep (left panel) and eight heart failure sheep (right panel). Significant differences are shown by: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; {dagger}p < 0.001.

 


View larger version (30K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 3 Mean ± SEM plasma renin activity, aldosterone, and endothelin-1 responses to incremental boluses of urocortin and a vehicle control in eight normal sheep (left panel) and eight heart failure sheep (right panel). Significant differences are shown by: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; {dagger}p < 0.001.

 


View larger version (32K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 4 Mean ± SEM plasma atrial natriuretic peptide, brain natriuretic peptide, norepinephrine, and epinephrine responses to incremental boluses of urocortin and a vehicle control in eight normal sheep (left panel) and eight heart failure sheep (right panel). Significant differences are shown by: *p < 0.05; {dagger}p < 0.001.

 


View larger version (55K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure 5 Mean ± SEM urine volume, sodium, potassium, creatinine, and cyclic adenosine monophosphate (AMP) excretion in response to incremental boluses of urocortin (striped bars) and a vehicle control (open bars) in eight normal sheep (left panel) and eight heart failure sheep (right panel). The overnight sample was collected from 4:00 PM to 10:00 AM. Significant differences are shown by: *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; {dagger}p < 0.001.

 




 
  CME Topic Collections Past Issues Search Current Issue Home

Advertisement