↓ Skip to main content

Transmural Heterogeneity of Myofilament Function and Sarcomeric Protein Phosphorylation in Remodeled Myocardium of Pigs with a Recent Myocardial Infarction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Transmural Heterogeneity of Myofilament Function and Sarcomeric Protein Phosphorylation in Remodeled Myocardium of Pigs with a Recent Myocardial Infarction
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2011.00083
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jolanda van der Velden, Daphne Merkus, Vincent de Beer, Nazha Hamdani, Wolfgang A. Linke, Nicky M. Boontje, Ger J. M. Stienen, Dirk J. Duncker

Abstract

Aim: Transmural differences in sarcomeric protein composition and function across the left ventricular (LV) wall have been reported. We studied in pigs sarcomeric function and protein phosphorylation in subepicardial (EPI) and subendocardial (ENDO) layers of remote LV myocardium after myocardial infarction (MI), induced by left circumflex coronary artery ligation. Methods: EPI and ENDO samples were taken 3 weeks after sham surgery (n = 12) or induction of MI (n = 12) at baseline (BL) and during β-adrenergic receptor (βAR) stimulation with dobutamine. Isometric force was measured in single cardiomyocytes at various [Ca(2+)] and 2.2 μm sarcomere length. Results: In sham hearts, no significant transmural differences were observed in myofilament function or protein phosphorylation. Myofilament Ca(2+)-sensitivity was significantly higher in both EPI and ENDO of MI compared to sham hearts. Maximal force was significantly reduced in MI compared to sham, but solely in ENDO cells. A higher passive force was observed in MI hearts, but only in EPI cells. The proportion of stiff N2B isoform was higher in EPI than in ENDO in both sham and MI hearts, and a trend toward increased N2B-proportion appeared in MI EPI, but not MI Endo. Analysis of myofilament protein phosphorylation did not reveal significant transmural differences in phosphorylation of myosin binding protein C, desmin, troponin T, troponin I (cTnI), and myosin light chain 2 (MLC-2) both at BL and during βAR stimulation with dobutamine infusion. A significant increase in MLC-2 phosphorylation was observed during dobutamine only in sham. In addition, the increase in cTnI phosphorylation upon dobutamine was twofold lower in MI than in sham. Conclusion: Myofilament dysfunction is present in both EPI and ENDO in post-MI remodeled myocardium, but shows a high degree of qualitative heterogeneity across the LV wall. These heterogeneous transmural changes in sarcomeric properties likely contribute differently to systolic vs. diastolic global LV dysfunction after MI.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 34%
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Engineering 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2011.
All research outputs
#20,165,369
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,270
of 13,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,848
of 180,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#34
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 180,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.