Doxycycline Decreases Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Aorta of ApoE-/- and Ovariectomized Mice with Correlation to Reduced MMP-2 Activity.

Atherogenic events promote changes in vessel walls, with alteration of the redox state, and increased activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). Thus, this study aims to evaluate aortic remodeling, MMP activity, and reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels after treatment with doxycycline in ApoE-/- and ovariectomized mice (OVX). Female ApoE-/--knockout mice (5 weeks) were submitted to ovariectomy surgery to induce experimental menopause. They then received chow enriched with 1% cholesterol to induce hypercholesterolemia. The animals were divided into two experimental groups: ApoE-/-/OVX vehicle and ApoE-/-/OVX doxycycline (30 mg/kg) administered by gavage once a day for 28 days (15th to the 18th week of life). Blood samples were collected to measure total cholesterol and fractions. The aorta was used for morphometry and to measure the activity and expression of MMP-2 and ROS levels. The ApoE-/-/OVX doxycycline group showed no change in total and fraction cholesterol levels. However, there was a reduction in ROS levels, MMP-2 expression, and activity that correlated with a decrease in atherosclerotic lesions relative to the ApoE-/-/OVX vehicle (p > 0.05). Therefore, we conclude that doxycycline in ApoE-/-/OVX animals promotes a reduction in atherosclerotic lesions by reducing ROS and MMP-2 activity and expression.

Does Ad Hoc Coronary Intervention Reduce Radiation Exposure? – Analysis of 568 Patients / Intervenção Coronariana Ad Hoc Reduz a Exposição Radiológica? - Análise em 568 Pacientes

Background:Advantages and disadvantages of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention have been described. However little is known about the radiation exposure of that procedure as compared with the staged intervention.Objective:To compare the radiation dose of the ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention with that of the staged procedureMethods:The dose-area product and total Kerma were measured, and the doses of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were added. In addition, total fluoroscopic time and number of acquisitions were evaluated.Results:A total of 568 consecutive patients were treated with ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 320) or staged percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 248). On admission, the ad hoc group had less hypertension (74.1% vs 81.9%; p = 0.035), dyslipidemia (57.8% vs. 67.7%; p = 0.02) and three-vessel disease (38.8% vs. 50.4%; p = 0.015). The ad hoc group was exposed to significantly lower radiation doses, even after baseline characteristic adjustment between both groups. The ad hoc group was exposed to a total dose-area product of 119.7 ± 70.7 Gycm2, while the staged group, to 139.2 ± 75.3 Gycm2 (p < 0.001).Conclusion:Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention reduced radiation exposure as compared with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed at two separate times.

Fundamento:Uma série de vantagens e desvantagens tem sido descrita para a intervenção coronária percutânea ad hoc, como a realizada ao mesmo tempo que o cateterismo diagnóstico, porém pouco se sabe sobre a exposição radiológica desse procedimento, comparado com a intervenção estadiada, ou seja, em dois momentos.Objetivo:Comparar a dose de radiação utilizada na angioplastia ad hoc com a angioplastia estadiada.Métodos:O produto de dose por área e o Kerma total foram mensurados, somando-se ambas as fases de diagnóstico e terapêutica. Além disso, foram computados o tempo total de fluoroscopia e o número de filmagens.Resultados:Um total de 568 pacientes consecutivos foram tratados com intervenção coronária percutânea ad hoc (n = 320) ou estadiada (n = 248). À admissão, o grupo do ad hoc apresentava menos hipertensão (74,1% vs. 81,9%; p = 0,035), dislipidemia (57,8% vs. 67,7%; p = 0,02) e doença triarterial (38,8% vs. 50,4%; p = 0,015). O grupo ad hoc foi exposto a doses significativamente menores de radiação, mesmo após ajuste para as diferenças basais entre os grupos. O grupo ad hoc foi exposto a uma dose de produto de dose por área total de 119,7 ± 70,7 Gycm2 enquanto que os pacientes estadiados foram expostos a uma dose de 139,2 ± 75,3 Gycm2 (p < 0,001).Conclusão:A intervenção coronária percutânea ad hoc reduziu a exposição radiológica, em comparação com procedimentos diagnósticos e terapêuticos realizados em tempos separados.

Does Ad Hoc Coronary Intervention Reduce Radiation Exposure? - Analysis of 568 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Advantages and disadvantages of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention have been described. However little is known about the radiation exposure of that procedure as compared with the staged intervention. OBJECTIVE: To compare the radiation dose of the ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention with that of the staged procedureMethods:The dose-area product and total Kerma were measured, and the doses of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were added. In addition, total fluoroscopic time and number of acquisitions were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 568 consecutive patients were treated with ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 320) or staged percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 248). On admission, the ad hoc group had less hypertension (74.1% vs 81.9%; p = 0.035), dyslipidemia (57.8% vs. 67.7%; p = 0.02) and three-vessel disease (38.8% vs. 50.4%; p = 0.015). The ad hoc group was exposed to significantly lower radiation doses, even after baseline characteristic adjustment between both groups. The ad hoc group was exposed to a total dose-area product of 119.7 ± 70.7 Gycm2, while the staged group, to 139.2 ± 75.3 Gycm2 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention reduced radiation exposure as compared with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed at two separate times.