JPET

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kawashima, S.
Right arrow Articles by Liang, C. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kawashima, S.
Right arrow Articles by Liang, C. S.

Systemic and coronary hemodynamic effects of pinacidil, a new antihypertensive agent, in awake dogs: comparison with hydralazine

S Kawashima and CS Liang

We compared the systemic and coronary hemodynamic effects of four successive doses of pinacidil, a new experimental antihypertensive agent, with hydralazine in awake normal dogs. The two agents produced comparable dose-dependent decreases in total peripheral vascular resistance, but, compared to hydralazine, pinacidil has only a minor inotropic effect, as evidenced by the changes in cardiac output, left ventricular dP/dt and dP/dt/P. Unlike hydralazine, pinacidil produced the changes only after aortic pressure had decreased significantly. The inotropic effects of pinacidil were abolished by propranolol pretreatment, suggesting that these effects are mediated by beta adrenergic receptors, probably secondary to sympathetic activation of the baroreceptor reflex. In addition, although myocardial oxygen consumption and coronary blood flow were increased by both hydralazine and pinacidil, left ventricular work increased only after hydralazine administration. Coronary sinus oxygen saturation increased to a much greater degree after pinacidil (from 20 +/- 2 to 70 +/- 4%) than after hydralazine and the fall in myocardial oxygen extraction was greater with pinacidil, suggesting that pinacidil has a greater coronary vasodilator effect. Finally, the systemic and coronary vasodilator effects of pinacidil probably are not mediated via prostaglandins, beta receptor stimulation or adenosine because indomethacin, propranolol or aminophylline treatment had no effect upon its vascular effects. Thus, it appears that pinacidil differs from hydralazine in its mode of action and probably exerts its vasodilator effect by a direct action on vascular smooth muscle.

Volume 232, Issue 2, pp. 369-375, 02/01/1985
Copyright © 1985 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1985 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.