American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 1993
The angiotensin II antagonist saralasin inhibits ovulation in the perfused rat ovary.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Peterson C M, Zhu C, Mukaida T, Butler T A, Woessner J F, LeMaire W J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Our null hypothesis was that the angiotensin II antagonist saralasin does not reduce the number of ovulations in the rat ovarian perfusion model.
STUDY DESIGN: Ovaries from pregnant mare's serum gonadotropin-stimulated immature rats were perfused with nutrient media to which luteinizing hormone and 3-isobutyl-1-methylxanthine had been added to induce ovulation. Test perfusions were treated with saralasin 1 mumol/L (n = 0.5) and compared with controls (n = 5) with the Student t test. Perfusions with both saralasin and angiotensin II and dose-response evaluations were performed.
RESULTS: Saralasin-treated ovulations were 6.6 +/- 1.3 (mean + SEM) compared with 18.6 +/- 3.9, p < 0.02. The effects of saralasin could be reversed with the addition of an equimolar amount of angiotensin II. Dose-response evaluations showed a progressive inhibition of ovulation at 10(-8) to 10(-6) mol/L.
CONCLUSION: The angiotensin II antagonist saralasin inhibits ovulation in a dose-dependent fashion; this effect is canceled by the addition of equimolar concentrations of angiotensin II.
STUDY DESIGN: Ovaries from pregnant mare's serum gonadotropin-stimulated immature rats were perfused with nutrient media to which luteinizing hormone and 3-isobutyl-1-methylxanthine had been added to induce ovulation. Test perfusions were treated with saralasin 1 mumol/L (n = 0.5) and compared with controls (n = 5) with the Student t test. Perfusions with both saralasin and angiotensin II and dose-response evaluations were performed.
RESULTS: Saralasin-treated ovulations were 6.6 +/- 1.3 (mean + SEM) compared with 18.6 +/- 3.9, p < 0.02. The effects of saralasin could be reversed with the addition of an equimolar amount of angiotensin II. Dose-response evaluations showed a progressive inhibition of ovulation at 10(-8) to 10(-6) mol/L.
CONCLUSION: The angiotensin II antagonist saralasin inhibits ovulation in a dose-dependent fashion; this effect is canceled by the addition of equimolar concentrations of angiotensin II.