From the Department of Pharmacology, Hôpital Broussais (P.B.,
S.L.), and INSERM U337 (S.B., P.L., S.L.) Paris, and URA-CNRS 879 (P.C.),
Saint Cyr l'Ecole, France.
Abstract
AbstractThe relationships between
steady and pulsatile pressures, smooth muscle tone, and
arterial viscoelastic behavior remain a matter of
controversy. We previously showed that arterial wall
viscosity (AWV) was 3-fold lower in vivo than in vitro and suggested
that in vivo active mechanisms could minimize intrinsic AWV to improve
the efficiency of heart-vessel coupling energy balance. The aim of the
present study was to determine the role of smooth muscle tone on
AWV, under various levels of steady and pulsatile pressures, both in
vivo and in vitro. AWV of rat abdominal aorta was studied first in vivo
after bolus injections of phenylephrine (PE) or sodium
nitroprusside (SNP), then in vitro in response to PE or SNP. In vitro,
arterial segments were submitted first to steady pressure
(0 to 200 mm Hg) by increments of 20 mm Hg, then to
increasing levels of pulse pressure (20 to 50 mm Hg) at various
mean arterial pressures (75 to 150 mm Hg). AWV was
quantified as the area of the pressure/diameter relationship
hysteresis, issued from the simultaneous measurements of
pressure (Millar micromanometer) and diameter (NIUS
echotracking device). In vivo, AWV increased after PE and decreased
after SNP, in parallel with pressure changes. In vitro, AWV was not
significantly influenced by PE and SNP. After both PE and SNP, AWV
increased with pulse pressure but was not influenced by mean
arterial pressure. At any given pulse pressure, AWV was
higher in vitro than in vivo. The relation between AWV and pulse
pressure was significantly steeper in vitro than in vivo. These results
show that AWV is strongly influenced by steady and pulsatile mechanical
load but not by smooth muscle tone, both in vivo and in vitro. Factors
other than sustained smooth muscle activation should be explored to
explain the minimization of AWV in vivo compared with intrinsic in
vitro values.
Although it is well
known that biological tissues, including the arterial wall,
respond to stress through both elastic and viscous behaviors, the
viscous aspect has often been neglected. Indeed, authors acknowledged
the theoretical difficulties raised by taking viscosity into account
and the methodological difficulties for measuring
it.1 2 In most studies, viscosity was considered
a dampening phenomenon and expressed in term of phase delay. An
alternative approach, developed by mechanical engineers, was to
consider viscosity an energy-dissipating phenomenon during the
mechanical transduction.3 4 5 Indeed, a major
function of large arteries is to store mechanical energy generated by
the heart during systole and to restore it during diastole
to optimize the heart-vessel coupling.6 7 8 9 We
used this approach in a recent study10 and showed
that the viscosity measured in vivo in intact animals was 3-fold lower
than viscosity measured in vitro at the same arterial site
under similar pressure conditions. We hypothesized that active
mechanisms could compensate for intrinsic viscosity under
physiological conditions to improve the efficiency
of the heart-vessel coupling energy balance. The few studies that
determined the effect of smooth muscle tone on AWV yielded complex
results, showing either higher AWV in muscular
arteries7 11 and increased AWV in response to
smooth muscle contraction,12 13 or no effect
under sinusoidal pressure waves of small
amplitude.14 The objectives of the present
study were to determine the role of smooth muscle tone on AWV and to
compare in vivo experiments to in vitro ones performed under similar
pulsatile pressure conditions.
Methods
Animals
Determination of Dynamic Diameter-Pressure Relationship
Evaluation of AWV
AWV determines the emergence of a hysteresis loop, where it is possible
to distinguish the "distension" limb during systole from the
"recoil" limb during diastole. Arterial
diameter is smaller during distension than recoil at a given distending
force. The hysteresis loop corresponds to a classic adiabatic cycle in
thermodynamics. Indeed, the energy stored during the distension phase
(elastic energy or WE) is not fully restored during recoil. The energy
dissipated by the arterial wall (dW) per unit length during
1 cycle (
In Vivo Experiment
After establishing the dose-response curve for blood pressure with each
drug, we chose 2 different doses of PE and SNP to determine subpressor
responses (0.75 µg/kg bolus) or large changes in blood pressure (7.5
µg/kg bolus). PE and SNP were given in random order. We began with
saline, followed by the subpressor dose and then by the large dose.
Each injection was followed by a washout time of >5 minutes after the
blood pressure had returned to the baseline value. Pulsatile changes in
diameter and pressure were then measured during 3 periods of 4 seconds
framing the maximal blood pressure change. The average of the 3
measurements was retained as a single value.
In Vitro Experiment
We used the following protocol for studying the interrelationship
between smooth muscle tone and steady and pulse pressures. After the
equilibration period was completed, the bath was changed and replaced
by the same buffer in addition to the drug of interest. We chose to
study the drug concentration producing a maximal response, which
corresponded to final PE and SNP concentrations of
10-5 mol/L. The order of drug administration was
random. Under each drug, the protocol began by determining the
quasistatic pressure-diameter relationship between 0 and 200
mm Hg, up and down by 2-minute steps of 20 mm Hg. The artery was
set for 10 minutes at 75 mm Hg without PP; then 4 levels of PP
(20, 30, 40, and 50 mm Hg) were successively applied in
increasing order for 5 minutes each at a fixed frequency of 5 Hz. This
procedure was repeated for successive mean pressure levels of 100, 125,
and 150 mm Hg. The whole procedure was repeated for the second
drug after a 30-minute washout period at 100 mm Hg.
Statistical Analysis
Results
In Vivo Experiment
In Vitro Experiment
In Vivo/In Vitro Comparison
Discussion
The main result of the present study is that at any
combination of mean and pulse pressures in vitro, AWV was not
significantly different between PE and SNP. The second result of this
study is that in vitro relationships between AWV and PP were
significantly shifted upward, and with a steeper slope compared with in
vivo.
Consideration of Methods
The second challenge was to generate in vitro
physiological pressure waveforms. Previous works on
AWV have involved low-amplitude sinusoidal pressure waveforms. Under
these conditions of low-amplitude deformation, AWV was fairly
insensitive to frequency,20 a result that does
not reflect the true response of the arterial wall to the
physiological mechanical load. Indeed, viscous
phenomena depend not only on frequency but above all on the amplitude
and velocity of PP change.6 21 The natural
pressure waveform exhibits both high-amplitude and high-frequency
components that predominate during the distension phase. We thus
developed a pressure wave synthesizer to generate a pressure waveform
similar to the natural counterpart. We have shown that the synthesized
pressure waveforms did not differ significantly from in vivo
ones.10
Consideration of Findings
The fact that AWV was very low in vivo suggests that active mechanisms
could minimize the intrinsic viscosity of the arterial
wall. The main result of the present study is that in vitro AWV was
not significantly different between PE and SNP at any combination of
mean and pulse pressures, indicating that sustained changes in smooth
muscle tone have no influence on AWV. In vivo, changes in AWV in
response to PE and SNP were parallel to those of MBP and PP. Thus, it
was difficult to determine whether in vivo the changes in AWV were due
to changes in smooth muscle tone, MBP, or PP. The fact that in vitro,
PP, but not MBP or smooth muscle tone, influenced AWV suggests that in
vivo the changes in AWV in response to PE and SNP were primarily caused
by changes in PP. We may thus propose that AWV is not influenced by
sustained changes in smooth muscle tone either in vivo or in vitro
under similar pressure conditions.
This finding is in agreement with previous
studies14 21 that found no influence of smooth
muscle tone on AWV under dynamic conditions. These
studies14 21 used small sinusoidal waves to
generate small-amplitude stress oscillations. The authors
put forward that the amplitude of stress oscillations was
insufficient to allow breakage of actin-myosin bridges, a phenomenon
classically associated with viscous behavior. Our results extend their
finding to large physiological deformations and
establish evidence that the amplitude of stress
oscillations is the major determinant of AWV.
The fact that sustained changes in smooth muscle tone do not influence
AWV does not preclude that rapidly occurring changes in smooth muscle
tone may modulate AWV. Indeed, in the present study, AWV changed
within seconds after the bolus injection of PE or SNP. In addition, the
slope of the AWV-PP relationship was lower in vivo than in vitro,
suggesting that acute changes in smooth muscle tone could compensate
for the intrinsic in vitro AWV, even during rapid changes of
hemodynamic conditions. An additional explanation for
the in vivo/in vitro difference in AWV may involve the physical
properties of the arterial wall components. Indeed, in
contrast to very slow-reacting components (such as collagen
I20) that behave like stiff material under
rapidly changing stress, filamentous biopolymers such as vimentin may
undergo a change of phase (crystalline versus soluble) in response to
changes in the ionic environment.23 This has been
shown to affect the behavior of isolated cells24
and could therefore influence the viscosity of the arterial
wall.
In conclusion, AWV of the rat abdominal aorta is strongly influenced by
steady and pulsatile mechanical load but not by smooth muscle tone.
Factors other than sustained smooth muscle tone should be explored to
explain the optimization of AWV in vivo.
Selected Abbreviations and Acronyms
Footnotes
Reprint requests to Stéphane Laurent, MD, PhD, Service de Pharmacologie, Hôpital Broussais, 96 Rue Didot, 75674 Paris, Cedex 14, France.
Received January 29, 1998;
first decision March 2, 1998;
accepted April 8, 1998.
References
1.
Fung YC, Fronek K, Patitucci P. Pseudoelasticity
of arteries and the choice of its mathematical expression.
Am J Physiol.. 1979;237:H620H631.
2.
Nichols WW, O'Rourke M. MacDonald's Blood Flow
in Arteries. London, UK: Edward Arnold; 1990:398419.
3.
Taylor MG. Wave transmission through an assembly of
randomly branching elastic tubes. Bio Phys J.. 1966;6:697716.
4.
Brodley WE. Energy dissipation in mammalian arteries:
an assessment of the distribution of energy dissipation between the
blood and the vessel wall. J Biomech.. 1976;9:489494.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Bertram CD. Energy dissipation and pulse wave
attenuation in the canine carotid artery. J Biomech.. 1980;13:10611073.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Murphy RA. Mechanics of vascular smooth muscle. In:
Shepherd JT, Abboud FM, eds. Peripheral Circulation
and Organ Blood Flow: Handbook of Physiology, the
Cardiovascular System, Vol III. Bethesda, Md:
American Physiological Society; 1983:325351.
7.
Bergel DH. The dynamic elastic properties of the
arterial wall. J Physiol.. 1961;156:458469.
8.
Gow BS, Taylor MG. Measurement of viscoelastic
properties of arteries in living dogs. Circ Res.. 1968;23:111122.
9.
McDonald DA. Hemodynamics. Annu Rev
Physiol. 1968;30:525556.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
10.
Boutouyrie P, Bézie Y, Lacolley P, Challande P,
Chamiot-Clerc P, Bénétos A, Renaud JF, Safar M, Laurent S.
Viscosity of rat abdominal aorta: in vivo/in vitro comparison,
influence of endothelial function. Arterioscler
Thromb Vasc Biol. 1997;17:13461355.
11.
Learoyd BM, Taylor MG. Alteration with age in the
viscoelastic properties of human arterial walls. Circ
Res.. 1966;18:278292.
12.
Dobrin PB, Rovick AA. Influence of vascular smooth
muscle on contractile mechanics and elasticity of arteries.
Am J Physiol. 1969;217:16441652.
13.
Patel DJ, Janicki JS, Vaishnav RN, Young JT.
Dynamic anisotropy viscoelastic properties of the aorta in living dogs.
Circ Res.. 1973;32:92107.
14.
Büsse R, Bauer D, Sattler T, Schabert A.
Dependence of elastic and viscous properties of elastic arteries on
circumferential wall stress at two different smooth muscle tone.
Pflügers Arch.. 1981;390:113119.
15.
Tardy Y, Meister JJ, Perret F, Waeber B, Brunner HR.
Assessment of the elastic behavior of peripheral arteries
from a noninvasive measurement of their diameter-pressure curves.
Clin Phys Physiol Meas.. 1991;12:3954.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
16.
Boutouyrie P, Lacolley P, Girerd X, Beck L, Safar M,
Laurent S. Sympathetic activity decreases medium size artery compliance
in humans. Am J Physiol.. 1994;267:H1368H1376.
17.
Lacolley P, Glazer E, Challande P, Boutouyrie P, Mignot
JP, Duriez M, Levy B, Safar M, Laurent S. Structural changes and in
situ aortic pressure-diameter relationship in long-term
chemical-sympathectomized rats. Am J Physiol.. 1995;296:H407H416.
18.
Langewouters GJ, Wesseling KH, Godehard WJ. The static
elastic properties of 45 human thoracic and 20 abdominal aortas in
vitro and the parameters of a new model. J
Biomech. 1984:17:425435.
19.
Systat Version 5.01. Evanston, Ill: Systat
Inc; 1993.
20.
Fung YC. Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of
Living Tissues. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag;
1992:281320.
21.
Bauer R, Büsse R, Schabert A, Summa Y, Wetterer
E. Separate determination of pulsatile elastic and viscous forces
developed in arterial wall in vivo. Pflügers
Arch. 1979;380:221226.
22.
O'Rourke MF. Steady and pulsatile energy losses in the
systemic circulation under normal conditions and in simulated
arterial diseases. Cardiovasc Res.. 1967;1:313326.
23.
Janmey P, Eutenheur U, Traub P, Schliwa M. Viscoelastic
properties of vimentin compared to other filamentous biopolymer
networks. J Cell Biol.. 1991;113:155160.
24.
Wang N, Ingber DE. Control of cytoskeletal mechanics by
extracellular matrix, cell shape, and mechanical tension. Biophys
J. 1994;66:21812189.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
Third Workshop on Structure and Function of Large
Arteries: Part II
Smooth Muscle Tone and Arterial Wall Viscosity
An In Vivo/In Vitro Study
Key Words: viscosity arteries muscle, smooth sodium nitroprusside phenylephrine aorta
We used 11 male Wistar rats (Iffa-Credo France) aged 12 weeks
and weighing 320±20 g (mean±SD). The animals were managed according
to the French Ministry of Agriculture guidelines. Experiments were
conducted with animals under disodium thiopental anesthesia
(50 mg/kg IP). Animals were killed by exsanguination. The influence of
PE and SNP on AWV of rat abdominal aorta was determined first in vivo
in 5 rats, then in vitro in 6 rats.
Because viscosity is measured as the area of hysteresis of the
diameter-pressure relationship, we first simultaneously
measured pulsatile changes in diameter and pressure to determine their
relationship. In vivo and in vitro measurements were made in the same
way. Pulsatile changes in distending pressure were measured using a 2F
high-fidelity microtransducer (Millar Instruments, Nycomed). Pulsatile
changes in arterial diameter were measured with the NIUS 1
echotracking device (Asulab Research Laboratory) as previously
described.15 16 17 Briefly, the device measures
internal diameter and its systolo-diastolic variations with
a 10-MHz ultrasound transducer, with precision close to 50 µm
and 1 µm, respectively. The software was adapted for viscosity
measurements.10 Diameter and pressure were
simultaneously digitized and stored at a frequency of 2.5
kHz, giving a 4x10-4-second time domain
definition (0.0125 radian for a frequency of 5 Hz). The computerized
acquisition system derived the LCSA-pressure curve from the 2
continuous signals of arterial diameter and pressure and
fitted it using an arctangent model with 3 independent
parameters as described by Langewouters et
al.18 This model allows the calculation of
geometric and functional parameters at any pressure value
within the systolic-diastolic range. Because AWV
determines hysteresis in the pressure-diameter relationship, the
distension limb is distinct from the recoil limb. The calculation of
distensibility and compliance at MBP was performed on the
diastolic part of the curve, as previously
described.3 15
AWV was estimated by the area of hysteresis of the
pressure-volume relationship, both in vivo and in
vitro.5 As previously
described,10 the energy per unit of
arterial length exchanged from the blood to the
arterial wall during distension can be written as:
where P is pressure, LCSA is lumen cross-sectional
area, dLCSA is the elementary variation in lumen area, and

(1)
L is an
arbitrary length.
L) represents the viscous energy
(WV) and can be written as:

(2)
The quantity given by Equations 2

(3)
, and 3
corresponds
graphically to the area of the hysteresis loop of the pressure-LCSA
relationship. We developed dedicated software to measure this area
directly from the original pressure and diameter recordings,
using an integrative algorithm. Energies are expressed as joules per
meter during 1 cycle. Viscous energy (Wv) can be
expressed either in absolute values or as a percentage of total energy
(WT with
Wv=100x(WT-WE)/WT.
We chose to use the latter expression of AWV thereafter as
WV. This software permitted us to detect a phase
lag as small as 10-5 radian on simulated
sinusoidal time series. The practical precision of this method is given
by the precision of pressure and diameter measurements (0.5 mm Hg
and 1 µm, respectively) and can be estimated as better than
1x10-10 joule ·
m-1. Viscosity was measured on all cardiac
cycles recorded during 3 periods of 4 seconds (ie,
64 cycles)
and was averaged. Reproducibility coefficient was 10% within a given
measurement (ie, 20 successive cycles without replacement of the probe)
and 8% between measurements (ie, coefficient of variation on 2
successive measurements). The major source of variability in hysteresis
loop area was the variability in PP from pulse to pulse. The viscosity
measurement has been validated in vitro through an experimental setup
previously described,10 which included a pressure
wave synthesizer designed to generate in vitro pressure waves similar
to in vivo ones. We found that the combination of a rectangular
negative ramp electric signal and an adjustable proximal windkessel
provided realistic pressure, not significantly different from in vivo,
in time and frequency domains.10 We checked the
absence of time delay between pressure and diameter signals.
A 2F microtransducer was introduced through the left
femoral artery of anesthetized animals for aortic blood
pressure measurements. A venous PE-10 catheter was inserted in the
femoral vein for drug injections. A median laparotomy was then
performed, and the abdominal aorta was exposed but not dissected. The
echotransducer was stereotactically positioned 1 cm above
the aortic trifurcation, using 37°C warm isotonic saline as coupling
medium. The position of the pressure probe was adjusted visually and
assumed to be correct when the tip of the catheter was detected on the
radiofrequency signal of the aorta.
The experimental setup developed for in vitro
determination of AWV has been described in detail
previously.10 Arterial diameter and
pressure were measured and computed in the same way as in vivo.
Briefly, segments from the abdominal aorta were quickly removed and
placed in ice-cold Krebs buffer. The proximal end of the abdominal
aorta was cannulated with a 2F cannula and connected to a perfusion
line. The distal end was cannulated with a 2F high-fidelity
microtransducer to measure intraluminal pressure. The
arterial segment was then mounted in a specially designed
organ chamber containing oxygenated Krebs buffer at 37°C,
extended to its in vivo length, and pressurized with Krebs at a
constant pressure of 100 mm Hg for 30 minutes. The perfusion line
was composed of low-compliance polyethylene tubing, a pressure
reservoir containing oxygenated Krebs buffer at 37°C, a
proximal adjustable windkessel segment, and the PP synthesizer.
Data are expressed as mean±SEM. The effects of in vivo
administration of PE and SNP on AWV were analyzed with
repeated-measures ANOVA, with dose as a within-subject factor and drug
(PE, SNP) as a between-subject factor. Post hoc Bonferonni's test was
performed. In vitro experiments were analyzed with
repeated-measures ANOVA with MBP and PP level as a within-subject
factor and drug (PE, SNP) as a between-subject factor. We tested the
linear relationship between AWV on the one hand and mean or pulse
pressures on the other. Drug effect was tested with a C matrix post hoc
test. All tests were bilateral, and values of P<0.05 were
considered to denote significant differences. All statistical tests
were performed with Systat 5.0 software.19
The highest dose of SNP induced a significant decrease in MBP, PP,
SBP, DBP, and AWV, and a 2-fold increase in distensibility and
compliance (Table 1
). The highest dose of
PE induced opposite changes: a significant increase in MBP, PP, SBP,
DBP, and AWV and a 2-fold decrease in distensibility and compliance.
The abdominal aorta LCSA did not change under SNP despite the decrease
in blood pressure, whereas it increased significantly with the highest
dose of PE (Figure 1
).
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 1. Hemodynamic Parameters Determined In Vivo Under
Baseline Conditions and After SNP and PE in 5 Wistar
Rats

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Figure 1. In vivo pressure LCSA relationships obtained under
baseline conditions after PE and SNP. Mean LCSA increased after the
higher dose of PE and did not change after the low dose of PE. Mean
LCSA did not change after SNP despite the decrease in pressure.
LCSA of the abdominal aorta (Figure 2
) was significantly lower after PE than
after SNP, at any blood pressure level, both in static and dynamic
conditions (Table 2
). At any combination
of mean and pulse pressures, AWV was not significantly different
between PE and SNP. AWV increased significantly with PP but was not
influenced by MBP. Figure 3
shows that
the linear relationships between AWV and PP after PE and after SNP
(r=0.99, P<0.001, and r=0.98,
P<0.001, respectively) are superimposable.

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Figure 2. In vitro static (lines) and dynamic (lines and
symbols) pressure/LCSA obtained with PE (continuous lines) and SNP
(dotted lines). Dynamic pressure/LCSA relations were
represented for PP of 40 mm Hg at 4 successive levels
of MBP (75 open triangles, 100 solid triangles, 125 open circles, 150
solid circles). At each level of MBP, and both under quasistatic and
dynamic conditions, LCSA was significantly lower with PE than with
NP.
View this table:
[in a new window]
Table 2. AWV of Abdominal Aorta During PR or SNP Perfusion
Under In Vitro Conditions

View larger version (17K):
[in a new window]
Figure 3. Relationships between PP and viscous energy [Wv
(%)] observed in vitro (solid lines) and in vivo (dotted lines) with
both PE (closed symbols) and SNP (open symbols). In vitro, 1 extra
point at 60 mm Hg corresponds to values obtained in 3
experiments. In vivo, experimental points include not only 0.75- and
7.5-µg/kg doses but also intermediate doses that were used (2.5, 5,
and 10 µg/kg). There was no difference between PE and SNP either in
vivo or in vitro.
In vitro relationships between AWV and PP were significantly
(P<0.001) shifted upward compared with in vivo ones, with a
significantly steeper slope (0.22±0.01 versus 0.06±0.01%/mm Hg,
respectively; P<0.01). The in vivo AWV/PP relationship
tended toward a plateau for the higher and lower PPs. This pattern was
not observed in vitro.
The 2 prerequisites of the present study were (1) accurate
measurement of AWV in vivo, under physiological
pulsatile pressure and flow conditions, and (2) comparability of these
measurements with those obtained on the same arterial
segments in vitro under similar pressure conditions. We had to make
theoretical choices as to the characterization of AWV. Indeed, although
many models of viscoelasticity have been proposed, none has been proved
fully able to describe the behavior of the vascular
wall.20 Thus, instead of using a specific model,
we took advantage of the ability of the NIUS system to accurately
determine the pressure-diameter relationship and chose to measure AWV
directly through its thermodynamic expression, ie, the hysteresis loop
area of the pressure-diameter curve. This approach has the advantage of
stressing the physical consequence of viscosity, which is to dissipate
energy. Brodley4 and
Bertram5 applied this method to
arterial wall mechanics. As explained in the Methods
section, a prerequisite for measuring the hysteresis loop of the
pressure-diameter relationship was the synchronization of the 2
signals. In a dedicated experimental setup including a highly elastic
membrane, we have already shown that this was effectively the case,
with a negligible hysteresis loop area.10
The present study was undertaken to test the hypothesis that
smooth muscle tone could explain the in vivo/in vitro difference in
AWV.10 Indeed, we showed that the viscosity
measured in vivo in intact animals was 3-fold lower than viscosity
measured in vitro at the same arterial site under similar
pressure conditions. Although dissipation of pulsatile energy through
viscosity is only 1 aspect of the energy exchanges in the
cardiovascular system, it may become important under
abnormal conditions. Bertram5 showed that in vivo
viscoelasticity "contributes relatively little to energy dissipation
per cardiac cycle and pulse wave attenuation."
O'Rourke22 has shown that in vivo, the ratio of
pulsatile to total external work, although averaging only 10% under
control conditions, increased markedly when heart rate or
arterial distensibility decreased.
AWV
=
arterial wall viscosity
DBP
=
diastolic blood pressure
LCSA
=
lumen cross-sectional area
MBP
=
mean blood pressure
PE
=
phenylephrine
PP
=
pulse pressure
SBP
=
systolic blood pressure
SNP
=
sodium nitroprusside
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. L. Prantil, R. J. Jankowski, Y. Kaiho, W. C. de Groat, M. B. Chancellor, N. Yoshimura, and D. A. Vorp Ex vivo biomechanical properties of the female urethra in a rat model of birth trauma Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, April 1, 2007; 292(4): F1229 - F1237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. L. Armentano, J. G. Barra, D. B. Santana, F. M. Pessana, S. Graf, D. Craiem, L. M. Brandani, H. P. Baglivo, and R. A. Sanchez Smart Damping Modulation of Carotid Wall Energetics in Human Hypertension: Effects of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition Hypertension, March 1, 2006; 47(3): 384 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Wronski, E. Seeliger, P. B. Persson, A. Harnath, and B. Flemming Influence of baroreflex on volume elasticity of heart and aorta in the rabbit Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol, March 1, 2002; 282(3): R842 - R849. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Lacolley, P. Challande, S. Boumaza, G. Cohuet, S. Laurent, P. Boutouyrie, J.-A. Grimaud, D. Paulin, J.-M. D. Lamaziere, and Z. Li Mechanical properties and structure of carotid arteries in mice lacking desmin Cardiovasc Res, July 1, 2001; 51(1): 178 - 187. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. D. Frohlich The necessity for recognition and treatment of patients with "mild" hypertension J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 1, 1999; 34(5): 1369 - 1377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Mircoli, A. A. Mangoni, C. Giannattasio, G. Mancia, and A. U. Ferrari Heart Rate-Dependent Stiffening of Large Arteries in Intact and Sympathectomized Rats Hypertension, October 1, 1999; 34(4): 598 - 602. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. I. Cabrera Fischer, R. L. Armentano, F. M. Pessana, S. Graf, L. Romero, A. I. Christen, A. Simon, and J. Levenson Endothelium-dependent arterial wall tone elasticity modulated by blood viscosity Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, February 1, 2002; 282(2): H389 - H394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hypertension Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1998 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |