AJP - Heart Calcium Transients and Cell-Sarcomere
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 246: H768-H775, 1984;
0363-6135/84 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Scheel, K. W.
Right arrow Articles by Ingram, L. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Scheel, K. W.
Right arrow Articles by Ingram, L. A.

AJP - Heart and Circulatory Physiology, Vol 246, Issue 6 768-H775, Copyright © 1984 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Coronary, collateral, and perfusion territory responses to aortic banding

K. W. Scheel, B. L. Eisenstein and L. A. Ingram

The objectives of this study were 1) to separate anatomic from functional variables causing the increased minimal coronary resistance seen with hypertrophy; 2) to investigate whether increased intraluminal pressure and tangential wall stress lead to collateral proliferation; 3) to define changes in vascular perfusion territories resulting from hypertrophy. Coronary and collateral resistances of the four coronary arteries were determined in empty, beating hearts from 10 control dogs and 11 dogs with myocardial hypertrophy produced by 4 wk of aortic banding. In hypertrophied hearts the coronary flow per gram at 100 mmHg and the slope of the pressure-flow line were significantly decreased. Coronary flow-to-body weight ratios were not different; thus the decreased flow per gram tissue with hypertrophy was due to increased tissue mass rather than changes in vascular resistance. Collateral flows were similar for both groups, indicating that increased pressure and wall stress did not cause significant collateral growth. Both ventricles hypertrophied and all vascular beds were equally affected, but distribution of the increased mass varied for different vascular beds.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online