Initial Despair and Current Hope of Identifying a Clinically Useful Treatment of Myocardial Reperfusion Injury: Insights Derived from Studies of Platelet P2Y12 Antagonists and Interference with Inflammation and NLRP3 Assembly.

Myocardial necrosis following the successful reperfusion of a coronary artery occluded by thrombus in a patient presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) continues to be a serious problem, despite the multiple attempts to attenuate the necrosis with agents that have shown promise in pre-clinical investigations. Possible reasons include confounding clinical risk factors, the delayed application of protective agents, poorly designed pre-clinical investigations, the possible effects of routinely administered agents that might unknowingly already have protected the myocardium or that might have blocked protection, and the biological differences of the myocardium in humans and experimental animals. A better understanding of the pathobiology of myocardial infarction is needed to stem this reperfusion injury. P2Y12 receptor antagonists minimize platelet aggregation and are currently part of the standard treatment to prevent thrombus formation and propagation in STEMI protocols. Serendipitously, these P2Y12 antagonists also dramatically attenuate reperfusion injury in experimental animals and are presumed to provide a similar protection in STEMI patients. However, additional protective agents are needed to further diminish reperfusion injury. It is possible to achieve additive protection if the added intervention protects by a mechanism different from that of P2Y12 antagonists. Inflammation is now recognized to be a critical factor in the complex intracellular response to ischemia and reperfusion that leads to tissue necrosis. Interference with cardiomyocyte inflammasome assembly and activation has shown great promise in attenuating reperfusion injury in pre-clinical animal models. And the blockade of the executioner protease caspase-1, indeed, supplements the protection already seen after the administration of P2Y12 antagonists. Importantly, protective interventions must be applied in the first minutes of reperfusion, if protection is to be achieved. The promise of such a combination of protective strategies provides hope that the successful attenuation of reperfusion injury is attainable.

The Infarct-Limiting Effect of Remote Ischemic Conditioning in Rats Is Not Affected by Aspirin.

PURPOSE: Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) has been shown to be a powerful cardioprotective therapy in animal models. However, a protective effect in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction has failed to be confirmed. A recent pre-clinical study reported that aspirin which is routinely given to patients undergoing reperfusion therapy blocked the infarct-limiting effect of ischemic postconditioning. The present study was designed to test whether aspirin could also be blocking the infarct-limiting effect of RIC. METHODS: This was investigated in vivo using male Sprague Dawley rats (n = 5 to 6 per group) subjected to either 30 min of regional myocardial ischemia, followed by 120-min reperfusion, or additionally to a RIC protocol initiated after 20-min myocardial ischemia. The RIC protocol included four cycles of 5-min hind limb ischemia interspersed with 5-min reperfusion. Intravenous aspirin (30 mg/kg) or vehicle (saline) was administered after 15-min myocardial ischemia. RESULTS: RIC significantly reduced infarct size (IS) normalized to the area at risk, by 47%. Aspirin administration did not affect IS nor did it attenuate the infarct-limiting effect of RIC. CONCLUSION: Aspirin administration in the setting of myocardial infarction is not likely to interfere with the cardioprotective effect of RIC.