FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2138094870> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2138094870 endingPage "982" @default.
• W2138094870 startingPage "976" @default.
• W2138094870 abstract "HomeHypertensionVol. 65, No. 5Gained in Translation Free AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessResearch ArticlePDF/EPUBGained in TranslationProtective Paradigms for the Poststenotic Kidney Lilach O. Lerman and Stephen C. Textor Lilach O. LermanLilach O. Lerman From the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Search for more papers by this author and Stephen C. TextorStephen C. Textor From the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Search for more papers by this author Originally published23 Feb 2015https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.04364Hypertension. 2015;65:976–982Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 1, 2015: Previous Version 1 IntroductionAtherosclerotic renovascular disease (ARVD) is more commonly identified than ever before, particularly among the elderly population. By some accounts, >10% of new patients entering dialysis programs in the United States have ARVD as a major contributor to their end-stage renal disease. ARVD is also associated with accelerated renal injury, hypertension, and cardiovascular complications. Renovascular hypertension (RVH) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor and induces greater decline in cardiac function and structure than essential hypertension.1However, clinical trials show consistently that revascularization of the stenotic renal artery using percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) results in limited and inconsistent recovery of renal function.2 The reasons for the failure of revascularization to resolve renal dysfunction are complex and may include procedural complications, as well as pre-existing parenchymal injury, including endothelial dysfunction, inflammation, fibrosis, and microvascular remodeling in the poststenotic kidney.3Atherogenic comorbidities constitute important catalysts of renal damage in ARVD. In fact, atherosclerotic nephropathy can produce renal damage even with hemodynamically insignificant stenoses,4 suggesting a direct effect of atherosclerosis on the kidney. Furthermore, unlike patients with fibromuscular dysplasia, in patients with ARVD a decrease in stenotic-kidney perfusion does not correlate with the angiographic degree of stenosis,5 and cortical perfusion is reduced even with mild stenoses, underscoring the contribution of additional pathogenic factors to renal damage. Therefore, the quest for underlying mechanisms and promising interventions mandates development of experimental platforms that not only involve renal artery stenosis but also emulate the atherosclerotic milieu.Experimental Models of Renovascular InjuryUseful models of renal artery stenosis have been achieved in many laboratory animal species, including mice, rats, hamsters, rabbits, dogs, and monkeys, but usually without application of comorbidities.6 Our studies focused on developing a swine model with gradually developing renal artery stenosis secondary to unilateral renal arterial implantation of a local irritant coil. The advantages of the pig include its physiology, pathophysiology, vascular lesions, and lipid profile that resemble those observed in humans, and a body size suitable for use of clinical devices and interventions, and in turn rapid clinical translation.7 Pigs with renal artery stenosis are then fed with a high-cholesterol diet8,9 to simulate early diffuse atherosclerosis.Our studies showed that atherosclerosis superimposed on renal artery stenosis exacerbates renal inflammation, oxidative stress, and fibrosis.8,9 Interestingly, development of RVH was not exacerbated, possibly partly because of increased sodium excretion in hypercholesterolemia.10 Nevertheless, diffuse atherosclerosis aggravated injury in the contralateral kidney11,12 and the heart.13,14 Notably, RVH superimposed on hypercholesterolemia15 or diabetes mellitus16 exacerbates damage in the systemic vasculature and nonstenotic kidney in mice; further studies are needed to determine their impact on the murine stenotic kidney.Studies using the ARVD swine model aimed to elucidate and target the mechanisms implicated in renal injury in ARVD. In 2-kidneys,1-clip rodents, RVH and renal injury are sustained by interactions among the rennin–angiotensin–aldosterone system, nitric oxide, and vasoconstrictor prostaglandins,17–20 which activate proinflammatory, pro-oxidant, and profibrogenic mechanisms.16,21 In ARVD these mechanisms are compounded by atherogenic factors, which intensify within the poststenotic kidneys, oxidative stress and inflammation22–24 and in turn rarefaction of microvessels.25–27 Loss of microvessels (Figure [A]), a hallmark of many renal diseases, may be driven by fibrosis-restricting expansion of the renal microcirculation,28 by microvascular regression, direct mechanical, or metabolic injury to the microvascular wall, or degradation of growth factors by reactive oxygen species.29,30 Apoptosis and mitochondrial injury also contribute to vascular loss, tubulointerstitial hypoxia, and interstitial fibrosis31,32 leading to renal dysfunction and scarring,27,33–38 the apparent irreversible phase of kidney damage.Download figureDownload PowerPointFigure. A, Schematic of injurious mechanisms activated in the poststenotic kidney in atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS), and experimental therapeutic interventions that can potentially blunt them. B, Micro–computed tomographic images showing microvascular loss in the poststenotic kidney, which was rescued using mesenchymal stem cell–derived extracellular vesicles (EV).The failure of renal artery revascularization to restore renal function in ARVD provides the impetus to explore underlying mechanisms and treat the poststenotic kidney directly. Given the postulated paradigm (Figure [B]), we attempted to address mechanisms recognized to induce kidney damage in ARVD.Mechanisms Underlying Poststenotic Kidney InjuryHypoxiaThe contribution of hypoxia to poststenotic kidney injury has been controversial, partly because early measurements of renal-vein oxygen pressure failed to identify a fall in PO2.39 Nonetheless, studies in a rat 2-kidneys,1-clip model clearly documented renal hypoxia and inefficient oxygen utilization40 linked to increased oxidative stress.41 Indeed, careful studies of renal oxygenation indicate that renal vein PO2 may be deceptive, insofar as it is affected by arteriovenous shunting, countercurrent exchange, and reduced oxygen consumption.42 Subsequently, oxygen probes43 and blood oxygen level–dependent MR have shown that renal hypoxia could be regional, and that significant stenoses induce hypoxia and fibrosis in poststenotic human kidneys.35,44Nevertheless, restoration of renal arterial patency in ARVD, which aims to alleviate hypoxia, does not necessarily restore stenotic kidney blood flow and function. In pigs with nonatherosclerotic renal artery stenosis, renal function and blood pressure promptly improved after PTRA,3 whereas in pigs with ARVD kidney dysfunction persisted, and correlated with microvascular remodeling,45,46 resembling findings of clinical trials.2 Incomplete recovery of stenotic kidney glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in pigs is linked not only to structural remodeling of the poststenotic kidney but also to preprocedural inflammation and the functionality of renal microvessels.45 Similarly, the poststenotic human kidney releases inflammatory mediators,47 which remain elevated after PTRA despite a fall in renal hypoxia.36 Therefore, although hypoxia characterizes severe renal artery stenosis, it may not be fully responsible for poststenotic kidney dysfunction. This notion may partly account for the inconsistent role of hypoxia in kidney injury in ARVD.AtherosclerosisTo attenuate atherogenic factors such as hypercholesterolemia, we treated pigs with the cholesterol-lowering drug simvastatin. Simvastatin-treated pigs with renal artery stenosis and normal cholesterol improved stenotic kidney microvascular density and decreased glomerulosclerosis, despite unaltered cholesterol or blood pressure levels.25 Furthermore, in hypercholesterolemic ARVD pigs, despite unchanged RVH or cholesterol levels, simvastatin decreased renal oxidative stress and fibrosis,26 although GFR was unaffected. Hence, although HMG-CoA (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenyzme-A) reductase inhibitors have considerable pleiotropic effects on the stenotic kidney, this regimen alone does not suffice to restore renal function.Activation of the Renin–Angiotensin–Aldosterone SystemBlockers of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system acutely decrease poststenotic kidney GFR, yet many patients with ARVD tolerate long-term treatment with these agents without difficulty. To explore direct effects of an angiotensin receptor blocker on the poststenotic kidney, pigs with renal artery stenosis were treated with either valsartan or triple therapy (reserpine/hydralazine/hydrochlorothiazide). For a similar decrease in blood pressure, valsartan did not impair GFR more than triple-therapy in this model. Both regimens increased microvessel density, but valsartan also improved poststenotic cortical perfusion and decreased oxidative stress. We interpret these data to indicate that direct beneficial effects of valsartan on the kidney parenchyma may offset its vascular effect to reduce GFR, thereby preserving kidney function.48 Clearly, inhibition of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system bestows blood pressure–independent benefits on both the stenotic kidney and the other target organs.Oxidative and Inflammatory InjuryAngiotensin-II is a potent activator of NAD(P)H oxidase, a major enzymatic source for reactive oxygen species, and other inflammatory and atherogenic mediators increase reactive oxygen species production in the kidney and target organs. In pigs with ARVD, we blunted oxidative stress using a combination of the common antioxidants vitamins E and C.Antioxidant vitamins had no effect on blood pressure or GFR in pigs with renal artery stenosis, yet decreased renovascular resistance, improved tubular fluid dynamics, and decreased inflammation and fibrosis.49 Similarly, the antioxidant tempol effectively increases cortical blood flow and oxygen tension in clipped kidneys of 2-kidneys,1-clip rats.41 In pigs with ARVD, antioxidant vitamins improved endothelial function50 and upregulated protein degradation systems, resulting in blunted glomerulosclerosis and renal fibrosis, although GFR was not restored in this model. These studies positioned oxidative stress as an important mediator of renal injury in ARVD. The effects of antioxidant are partly mediated by their ability to attenuate renal remodeling because they are more effective in improving renal function and structure when delivered chronically than acutely.51 Antioxidants also restored microvascular architecture in the kidney27 and myocardium52 in renovascular hypertension, but did not fully restore GFR. Negative results of clinical trials also argued against their widespread use. Indeed, in healthy pigs, antioxidant vitamins led to a paradoxical increase in oxidative stress.53 Therefore, alternative strategies are needed to preserve poststenotic kidney function.Because monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 expression is upregulated in the stenotic kidney in both pigs54 and mice,16,21 we postulated that this inflammatory mediator contributes to poststenotic kidney injury. In pigs, inhibition of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 with Bindarit has no effect on RVH but improves renal blood flow, GFR, and endothelial function. Tubulointerstitial oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis decreased, although microvascular density increased only slightly.55 Hence, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 contributes to functional and structural remodeling of the poststenotic kidney and its inhibition may be protective.Microvascular RarefactionRegression and remodeling of intrarenal microvessels are pivotal mechanisms responsible for loss of poststenotic kidney function and progression of chronic kidney disease, and delivery of vascular growth factors improves renal function.56,57 Similarly, antagonism of the endothelin-A receptor enhances microvascular density and renal recovery in pigs with renal artery stenosis,58,59 ascribing an important role to endothelin-1 in regulating the microcirculation in the poststenotic kidney.Microvascular rarefaction is also amplified by impairment of endogenous repair mechanisms. Circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) are recruited in response to injury signals to facilitate microvascular and cellular repair, but their number and function can decline in subjects with ARVD after exposure to cardiovascular risk factors. We reasoned that replenishing EPC might enhance repair in poststenotic kidneys.We isolated from peripheral blood endothelial outgrowth progenitors, which possess proangiogenic characteristics. Injecting these cells directly into the stenotic renal artery increased renal expression of angiogenic factors, enhanced proliferation and maturation of vessels, attenuated microvascular remodeling and fibrosis, and ultimately improved renal blood flow, endothelial function, and GFR.60 EPC delivery also protects the murine kidney subjected to acute ischemic injury.61 Their effectiveness in ARVD is enabled by the expression of cognate receptors corresponding to injury signals released from the stenotic kidney,62 facilitating their local adhesion and retention. Thus, autologous EPCs are effective in both nonatherosclerotic renal artery stenosis and ARVD.Interestingly, the potency of EPC is greatest at the early phase of renovascular hypertension, corresponding to activation of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system.63 Yet, EPCs are less effective in the renal medulla than in the cortex, possibly because few EPCs reach this region. Nonetheless, tubular function was normalized and fibrosis attenuated when EPCs were delivered in association with PTRA.34 Adjunctive EPC delivery during PTRA restored GFR, improved renal blood flow and microvascular density, and decreased prevalence of proinflammatory macrophages and cytokines.64 Therefore, EPCs decrease poststenotic kidney injury and improve revascularization outcomes by preserving microvascular architecture and function and decreasing inflammation and fibrosis. Notably, preservation of renal function in turn improves myocardial microvascular integrity,65 underscoring the important contribution of renal dysfunction from ARVD to its cardiovascular sequelae.However, EPCs are difficult to harvest from peripheral blood, and their immunogenicity mandates autologous administration. Emerging evidence shows that mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are accessible for harvesting from many tissue sources, grow robustly in culture, and their anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties render them potentially suitable for allogeneic applications. We found that MSC delivery in conjunction with PTRA in ARVD attenuated interstitial fibrosis, inflammation, microvascular remodeling, oxidative stress, and apoptosis,66 and restored stenotic kidney hemodynamics and function, underscoring their therapeutic potential. Importantly, MSCs are slightly more effective than EPC in restoring renal function, possibly because of greater potency in blunting inflammation and apoptosis.67 MSCs decrease stenotic kidney release of tumor necrosis factor-α and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1,54 consistent with their potent anti-inflammatory properties.The mechanisms of action of MSC might include regulation of post-transcriptional regulators such as micro-RNAs68 and release of extracellular membrane vesicles.69 Micro-RNA and mRNA packed in these vectors modulate angiogenesis and other pathways in recipient cells and mediate the paracrine activities of MSC (Figure [A]).Similar to EPCs, MSCs are less effective in repairing medullary damage, possibly because of their relatively lower engraftment rate compared with the cortex (≈1:5). Yet, MSCs adjunctive to PTRA attenuate tubular injury and inflammation and reduce capillary loss.33 Alas, they may paradoxically increase medullary hypoxia by boosting tubular oxygen consumption.33Mitochondrial InjuryIschemic kidney injury might be propagated by cell death and disturbed cellular energetics, events that are regulated by mitochondria. Furthermore, ischemia/reperfusion injury may contribute to limited efficacy of renal artery revascularization. To assess the involvement of mitochondria, we infused intravenously a mitochondrial-targeted peptide immediately before and during PTRA. Bendavia is a tetrapeptide that prevents oxidation of cardiolipin, a phospholipid constituent of the inner-mitochondrial membrane. Stenotic kidney blood flow and GFR improved 4 weeks after PTRA with adjunctive Bendavia infusion, compared with pigs undergoing PTRA accompanied by vehicle infusion. Bendavia restored renal mitochondrial biogenesis and decreased microvascular refraction, apoptosis, oxidative stress, and fibrosis.32 Hence, mitochondrial injury incurred during reperfusion may amplify renal injury and limit recovery after PTRA. Importantly, chronic Bendavia treatment without PTRA was also effective in blunting renal damage in ARVD, normalized renal endothelial function, improved kidney oxygenation, and attenuated fibrosis.31 Studies in rats have demonstrated the efficacy of pretreatment with a mitochondrial-targeted peptide to increased renal tolerance to acute ischemia.70 These studies suggest that mitochondrial dysfunction contributes to the pathogenesis of both chronic and acute aspects of kidney injury, and targeting these organelles might protect the ischemic kidney (Figure [B]). Mitochondrial protection also improved cardiac function after reversal of RVH.71,72Systemic Effects of ARVDAn important observation is that pathways of injury in a stenotic kidney contribute to significant risks for the nonstenotic kidney, the cardiovascular system, and arterial pressure. The poststenotic kidney in both animals and human subjects releases inflammatory injury signals,47,54,65 and their levels rise not only in the stenotic but also in the contralateral kidney, suggesting renorenal crosstalk and systemic effects of ARVD. Consequently, damage and inflammatory markers in the contralateral kidney are greater than those induced by simple nephrectomy or even angiotensin-II infusion.16 Furthermore, cardiac hypertrophy and dysfunction are magnified in patients with RVH compared with essential hypertension.1Remarkably, the magnitude of RVH seems to be at least partly disassociated from the extent of renal injury. For example, in swine, ARVD-superimposed atherosclerosis magnifies renal injury,8,9 yet RVH levels remain similar to those in pigs with nonatherosclerotic renal artery stenosis.46,73 Furthermore, hypertension can be fully reversed by PTRA despite residual kidney injury,3,45,46,64,66 again suggesting that kidney injury is not closely correlated to the severity of RVH. The disassociation between the reversibility of renal function and hypertension in animal models is consistent with the results of the CORAL trial, in which despite the lack of efficacy of stenting to improve renal function compared with medical therapy alone, it achieved a modest decrease in blood pressure.2These observations underscore the need for multiple levels of therapy in this disease. Revascularization may have a role specifically related to blood pressure control and avoiding pulmonary edema, whereas adjunctive therapies, directly targeting underlying mechanisms responsible for renal injury in ARVD, are required to recover renal function. Identification of the basic mechanisms that lead to kidney tissue injury in ARVD can assist in the development of targeted therapies. We think that addressing those injurious pathways directly can improve stenotic kidney blood flow, GFR, fibrosis, and reverse microvascular loss. They may also improve the efficacy of revascularization with PTRA and stenting. Such targeted therapeutic interventions with or without PTRA might constitute effective tools for improving kidney and cardiovascular outcomes of ARVD. Importantly, some of the novel experimental approaches seem to also benefit the contralateral kidney and the heart in pigs with ARVD.Building on observations in animal models, our group has recently moved forward to extend these paradigms into clinical trials for ARVD. We are currently studying the effects of intra-arterial delivery of adipose tissue–derived MSC on tissue oxygenation and inflammatory injury. For patients who are candidates for renal revascularization, phase I trials of intravenous Bendavia will allow direct examination of mitochondrial protection during ischemia/reperfusion processes in the poststenotic kidney during PTRA and stenting. These steps toward clinical translation may assist clinicians in developing strategies to protect and recover function in the poststenotic kidney.PerspectivesThe prevalence of ARVD is on the rise. The failure to demonstrate benefits from renal artery revascularization in prospective clinical trials has led to a precipitous fall in the application of PTRA and stenting, leaving few options available to preserve the poststenotic kidney. Alas, the presence of this kidney, by virtue of low function and robust cytokine production, introduces a significant cardiovascular risk, underscoring the need to identify strategies to attenuate kidney injury and increase the efficacy of interventional techniques. To this end, relevant experimental models are proving invaluable to afford insights into the pathogenesis of ARVD and serve as experimental platforms to test novel therapeutic tools (Figure [B]). Further translational and clinical trials are needed to explore and develop innovative approaches to preserve the poststenotic kidney and improve the management of patients with ARVD.Sources of FundingThis work was partly supported by National Institutes of Health grants DK73608, DK100081, HL121561, DK104273, and HL123160.DisclosuresNone.FootnotesCorrespondence to Lilach O. Lerman, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E-mail [email protected]References1. Khangura KK, Eirin A, Kane GC, Misra S, Textor SC, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Cardiac function in renovascular hypertensive patients with and without renal dysfunction.Am J Hypertens. 2014; 27:445–453. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpt203.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Cooper CJ, Murphy TP, Cutlip DE, et al; CORAL Investigators. Stenting and medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2014; 370:13–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1310753.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Favreau F, Zhu XY, Krier JD, Lin J, Warner L, Textor SC, Lerman LO. Revascularization of swine renal artery stenosis improves renal function but not the changes in vascular structure.Kidney Int. 2010; 78:1110–1118. doi: 10.1038/ki.2010.142.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Wright JR, Shurrab AE, Cheung C, Waldek S, O’Donoghue DJ, Foley RN, Mamtora H, Kalra PA. A prospective study of the determinants of renal functional outcome and mortality in atherosclerotic renovascular disease.Am J Kidney Dis. 2002; 39:1153–1161. doi: 10.1053/ajkd.2002.33384.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Lerman LO, Taler SJ, Textor SC, Sheedy PF, Stanson AW, Romero JC. Computed tomography-derived intrarenal blood flow in renovascular and essential hypertension.Kidney Int. 1996; 49:846–854.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Lerman LO, Chade AR, Sica V, Napoli C. Animal models of hypertension: an overview.J Lab Clin Med. 2005; 146:160–173. doi: 10.1016/j.lab.2005.05.005.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Lerman LO, Schwartz RS, Grande JP, Sheedy PF, Romero JC. Noninvasive evaluation of a novel swine model of renal artery stenosis.J Am Soc Nephrol. 1999; 10:1455–1465.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Chade AR, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Grande JP, Krier JD, Lerman A, Romero JC, Napoli C, Lerman LO. Distinct renal injury in early atherosclerosis and renovascular disease.Circulation. 2002; 106:1165–1171.LinkGoogle Scholar9. Chade AR, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Grande JP, Zhu X, Sica V, Napoli C, Sawamura T, Textor SC, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Mechanisms of renal structural alterations in combined hypercholesterolemia and renal artery stenosis.Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2003; 23:1295–1301. doi: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000077477.40824.52.LinkGoogle Scholar10. Feldstein A, Krier JD, Sarafov MH, Lerman A, Best PJ, Wilson SH, Lerman LO. In vivo renal vascular and tubular function in experimental hypercholesterolemia.Hypertension. 1999; 34(4 Pt 2):859–864.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11. Lavi R, Zhu XY, Chade AR, Lin J, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Simvastatin decreases endothelial progenitor cell apoptosis in the kidney of hypertensive hypercholesterolemic pigs.Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010; 30:976–983. doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.109.201475.LinkGoogle Scholar12. Rodriguez-Porcel M, Krier JD, Lerman A, Sheedy PF, Romero JC, Napoli C, Lerman LO. Combination of hypercholesterolemia and hypertension augments renal function abnormalities.Hypertension. 2001; 37(2 Pt 2):774–780.LinkGoogle Scholar13. Rodriguez-Porcel M, Lerman A, Herrmann J, Schwartz RS, Sawamura T, Condorelli M, Napoli C, Lerman LO. Hypertension exacerbates the effect of hypercholesterolemia on the myocardial microvasculature.Cardiovasc Res. 2003; 58:213–221.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14. Rodriguez-Porcel M, Lerman LO, Herrmann J, Sawamura T, Napoli C, Lerman A. Hypercholesterolemia and hypertension have synergistic deleterious effects on coronary endothelial function.Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2003; 23:885–891. doi: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000069209.26507.BF.LinkGoogle Scholar15. Arruda RM, Peotta VA, Meyrelles SS, Vasquez EC. Evaluation of vascular function in apolipoprotein E knockout mice with angiotensin-dependent renovascular hypertension.Hypertension. 2005; 46:932–936. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000182154.61862.52.LinkGoogle Scholar16. Hartono SP, Knudsen BE, Lerman LO, Textor SC, Grande JP. Combined effect of hyperfiltration and renin angiotensin system activation on development of chronic kidney disease in diabetic db/db mice.BMC Nephrol. 2014; 15:58. doi: 10.1186/1471-2369-15-58.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Lazartigues E, Lawrence AJ, Lamb FS, Davisson RL. Renovascular hypertension in mice with brain-selective overexpression of AT1a receptors is buffered by increased nitric oxide production in the periphery.Circ Res. 2004; 95:523–531. doi: 10.1161/01.RES.0000140892.86313.c2.LinkGoogle Scholar18. Cervenka L, Horácek V, Vanecková I, Hubácek JA, Oliverio MI, Coffman TM, Navar LG. Essential role of AT1A receptor in the development of 2K1C hypertension.Hypertension. 2002; 40:735–741.LinkGoogle Scholar19. Welch WJ, Patel K, Modlinger P, Mendonca M, Kawada N, Dennehy K, Aslam S, Wilcox CS. Roles of vasoconstrictor prostaglandins, COX-1 and -2, and AT1, AT2, and TP receptors in a rat model of early 2K,1C hypertension.Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007; 293:H2644–H2649. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00748.2007.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar20. Lerman LO, Nath KA, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Krier JD, Schwartz RS, Napoli C, Romero JC. Increased oxidative stress in experimental renovascular hypertension.Hypertension. 2001; 37(2 Pt 2):541–546.LinkGoogle Scholar21. Cheng J, Zhou W, Warner GM, Knudsen BE, Garovic VD, Gray CE, Lerman LO, Platt JL, Romero JC, Textor SC, Nath KA, Grande JP. Temporal analysis of signaling pathways activated in a murine model of two-kidney, one-clip hypertension.Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2009; 297:F1055–F1068. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.90439.2008.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar22. Chade AR, Bentley MD, Zhu X, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Niemeyer S, Amores-Arriaga B, Napoli C, Ritman EL, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Antioxidant intervention prevents renal neovascularization in hypercholesterolemic pigs.J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004; 15:1816–1825.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar23. Chade AR, Best PJ, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Herrmann J, Zhu X, Sawamura T, Napoli C, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Endothelin-1 receptor blockade prevents renal injury in experimental hypercholesterolemia.Kidney Int. 2003; 64:962–969. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2003.00170.x.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar24. Wilson SH, Chade AR, Feldstein A, Sawamura T, Napoli C, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Lipid-lowering-independent effects of simvastatin on the kidney in experimental hypercholesterolaemia.Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2003; 18:703–709.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar25. Chade AR, Zhu X, Mushin OP, Napoli C, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Simvastatin promotes angiogenesis and prevents microvascular remodeling in chronic renal ischemia.FASEB J. 2006; 20:1706–1708. doi: 10.1096/fj.05-5680fje.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar26. Chade AR, Zhu XY, Grande JP, Krier JD, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Simvastatin abates development of renal fibrosis in experimental renovascular disease.J Hypertens. 2008; 26:1651–1660. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e328302833a.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar27. Zhu XY, Chade AR, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Bentley MD, Ritman EL, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Cortical microvascular remodeling in the stenotic kidney: role of increased oxidative stress.Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004; 24:1854–1859. doi: 10.1161/01.ATV.0000142443.52606.81.LinkGoogle Scholar28. Chade AR, Mushin OP, Zhu X, Rodriguez-Porcel M, Grande JP, Textor SC, Lerman A, Lerman LO. Pathways of renal fibrosis and modulation of matrix turnover in experimental hypercholesterolemia.Hypertension. 2005; 46:772–779. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000184250.37607.da.LinkGoogle Scholar29. Lerman LO, Chade AR. Atherosclerotic process, renovascular disease and outcomes from bench to bedside.Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2006; 15:583–587. doi: 10.1097/01.mnh.0000247494.77752.f4." @default.
• W2138094870 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2138094870 creator A5027367849 @default.
• W2138094870 creator A5079447750 @default.
• W2138094870 date "2015-05-01" @default.
• W2138094870 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W2138094870 title "Gained in Translation" @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1965566754 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1968553391 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1973057151 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1976636520 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1984233933 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1988339921 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1990984872 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1992666640 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W1999555489 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2000294090 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2008409592 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2014901923 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2015856895 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2021393523 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2022629721 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2024271266 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2032263249 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2034194113 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2037520995 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2049221248 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2054020448 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2056780646 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2057336465 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2061415261 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2062235476 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2072344820 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2078542039 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2082226925 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2083188516 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2099722446 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2104984339 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2106101972 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2109190880 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2109625840 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2110042341 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2111517426 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2111883045 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2115868363 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2119312102 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2123125432 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2123193350 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2126212604 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2126697850 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2127873167 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2129663390 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2130417705 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2132122551 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2134064731 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2134133073 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2139556255 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2140364077 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2145353891 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2145388402 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2146400783 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2146422062 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2147224653 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2148367988 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2150921687 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2152011279 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2154636200 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2155888953 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2156608608 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2157223085 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2157405158 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2161488837 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2163472560 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2164905531 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2165119656 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2165434770 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2165571598 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2171112739 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2313003876 @default.
• W2138094870 cites W2326573810 @default.
• W2138094870 doi "https://doi.org/10.1161/hypertensionaha.114.04364" @default.
• W2138094870 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4393355" @default.
• W2138094870 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25712725" @default.
• W2138094870 hasPublicationYear "2015" @default.
• W2138094870 type Work @default.
• W2138094870 sameAs 2138094870 @default.
• W2138094870 citedByCount "17" @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702015 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702016 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702017 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702018 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702019 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702020 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702021 @default.
• W2138094870 countsByYear W21380948702022 @default.
• W2138094870 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2138094870 hasAuthorship W2138094870A5027367849 @default.
• W2138094870 hasAuthorship W2138094870A5079447750 @default.

• next