The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Myocardial Protection by Brief Ischemia in Noncardiac Tissue
Open accessAbstract
Background Brief coronary artery occlusions (CAOs) protect both the artery's own perfusion territory (“myocardial preconditioning”) and adjacent “virgin” myocardium. Whether ischemia in remote organs protects myocardium is unknown. We examined whether brief occlusion of the anterior mesenteric artery (MAO) or left renal artery (RAO) protects against myocardial infarction. Methods and Results Area at risk (AR) and infarcted area (IA) were determined in anesthetized rats after 180 minutes of reperfusion following a 60-minute CAO. At normothermia (body temperature, 36.5°C to 37.5°C), IA/AR was 68±2% (mean±SEM, n=11) in control rats and 50±3% (n=9, P <.001) in rats preconditioned by 15-minute CAO 10 minutes before 60-minute CAO. A 15-minute MAO was equally protective (IA/AR=50±3%, n=10, P <.001), whereas 15-minute RAO failed to limit IA/AR (72±5%, n=8). Hypothermia (body temperature, 30°C to 31°C) did not affect IA/AR (67±3%, n=11) in control animals but enhanced protection by 15-minute CAO (IA/AR=22±3%, n=8), whereas protection by 15-minute MAO (IA/AR=44±5%, n=11, P <.001) was minimally enhanced. Hypothermia unmasked protection by 15-minute RAO (IA/AR=46±6%, n=9, P <.01). Hexamethonium (20 mg/kg IV) did not alter protection by 15-minute CAO, but it abolished protection by 15-minute MAO. When MAO was sustained throughout the study, cardioprotection was absent. Conclusions Brief ischemia in “remote” organs protects myocardium against infarction as effectively as myocardial preconditioning. The mechanism of protection by MAO differs from that of CAO, because ganglion blockade abolished protection by MAO but not by CAO. The neurogenic pathway is activated during reperfusion after 15-minute MAO, because sustained MAO failed to produce cardioprotection.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Ischaemic conditioning and reperfusion injury
Hausenloy, D. J., & Yellon, D. M. (2016) · Nature Reviews Cardiology · doi:10.1038/nrcardio.2016.5 · Cited by 579
Loukogeorgakis, S. P., Panagiotidou, A. T., Broadhead, M. W., Donald, A., Deanfield, J. E., & MacAllister, R. J. (2005) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.04.044 · Cited by 434
Circulating Nitrite Contributes to Cardioprotection by Remote Ischemic Preconditioning
Rassaf, T., Totzeck, M., Hendgen-Cotta, U. B., Shiva, S., Heusch, G., & Kelm, M. (2014) · Circulation Research · doi:10.1161/circresaha.114.303822 · Cited by 344
Ischaemic conditioning and targeting reperfusion injury: a 30 year voyage of discovery
Hausenloy, D. J., Barrabes, J. A., Bøtker, H. E., Davidson, S. M., Di Lisa, F., Downey, J., Engstrom, T., Ferdinandy, P., Carbrera-Fuentes, H. A., Heusch, G., et al. (2016) · Basic Research in Cardiology · doi:10.1007/s00395-016-0588-8 · Cited by 308
A comparison of organic and inorganic nitrates/nitrites
Omar, S. A., Artime, E., & Webb, A. J. (2012) · Nitric Oxide · doi:10.1016/j.niox.2012.03.008 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Gho, B. C. G., Schoemaker, R. G., van den Doel, M. A., Duncker, D. J., & Verdouw, P. D.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 1996-11
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 2193-2200
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2146350062
- Cited by
- 618
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Myocardial Protection by Brief Ischemia in Noncardiac Tissue. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.94.9.2193
- The paper
- Gho, B. C. G., Schoemaker, R. G., van den Doel, M. A., Duncker, D. J., & Verdouw, P. D. (1996). Myocardial Protection by Brief Ischemia in Noncardiac Tissue. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.94.9.2193
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.