Dapagliflozin reduces the vulnerability of rats with pulmonary arterial hypertension-induced right heart failure to ventricular arrhythmia by restoring calcium handling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Malignant ventricular arrhythmia (VA) is a major contributor to sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH)-induced right heart failure (RHF). Recently, dapagliflozin (DAPA), a sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), has been found to exhibit cardioprotective effects in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. In this study, we examined the effects of DAPA on VA vulnerability in a rat model of PAH-induced RHF. Methods Rats randomly received monocrotaline (MCT, 60 mg/kg) or vehicle via a single intraperitoneal injection. A day later, MCT-injected rats were randomly treated with placebo, low-dose DAPA (1 mg/kg/day), or high-dose (3 mg/kg/day) DAPA orally for 35 days. Echocardiographic analysis, haemodynamic experiments, and histological assessments were subsequently performed to confirm the presence of PAH-induced RHF. Right ventricle (RV) expression of calcium (Ca 2+ ) handling proteins were detected via Western blotting. RV expression of connexin 43 (Cx43) was determined via immunohistochemical staining. An optical mapping study was performed to assess the electrophysiological characteristics in isolated hearts. Cellular Ca 2+ imaging from RV cardiomyocytes (RVCMs) was recorded using Fura-2 AM or Fluo-4 AM. Results High-dose DAPA treatment attenuated RV structural remodelling, improved RV function, alleviated Cx43 remodelling, increased the conduction velocity, restored the expression of key Ca 2+ handling proteins, increased the threshold for Ca 2+ and action potential duration (APD) alternans, decreased susceptibility to spatially discordant APD alternans and spontaneous Ca 2+ events, promoted cellular Ca 2+ handling, and reduced VA vulnerability in PAH-induced RHF rats. Low-dose DAPA treatment also showed antiarrhythmic effects in hearts with PAH-induced RHF, although with a lower level of efficacy. Conclusion DAPA administration reduced VA vulnerability in rats with PAH-induced RHF by improving RVCM Ca 2+ handling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".