Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journal of Clinical Investigation logoLink to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
. 1972 Feb;51(2):279–287. doi: 10.1172/JCI106812

Differences in Direct Effects of Adrenergic Stimuli on Coronary, Cutaneous, and Muscular Vessels

Allyn L Mark 1, Francois M Abboud 1, Phillip G Schmid 1, Donald D Heistad 1, Howard E Mayer 1
PMCID: PMC302125  PMID: 4400290

Abstract

Direct effects of adrenergic stimuli on coronary vessels in dogs were compared with effects on vessels to skin (hind paw) and skeletal muscle (gracilis muscle) after intravenous administration of practolol (2 mg/kg), a selective myocardial beta receptor blocker which minimized indirect effects of myocardial stimulation on coronary vascular resistance. The left circumflex coronary, cranial tibial, and gracilis arteries were perfused separately but simultaneously at constant flow. Perfusion pressures, left ventricular pressure and dP/dt. and heart rate were recorded. Changes in perfusion pressure to each bed reflected changes in vascular resistance.

The direct constrictor effects of sympathetic nerve stimulation, norepinephrine and phenylephrine on coronary vessels were minimal compared with effects on cutaneous and muscular vessels. Subsequent blockade of vascular beta receptors did not augment the constrictor responses. Angiotensin, a nonadrenergic stimulus, produced striking coronary vasoconstriction which exceeded that in skin and approximated that in muscle. These results suggests that there is a paucity of alpha adrenergic receptors in coronary vessels compared to cutaneous and muscular vessels.

Direct dilator responses to isoproterenol were similar in coronary and cutaneous vessels, but were greater in muscular vessels. Responses to glyceryl trinitrate, a nonadrenergic dilator, also were greater in skeletal muscle. Therefore, differences in effects of isoproterenol on the three beds may reflect differences in reactivity to dilator stimuli rather than differences in the density of beta receptors.

In contrast to norepinephrine, the predominant direct effect of epinephrine on coronary vessels was dilatation mediated through activation of vascular beta receptors. A constrictor effect caused by stimulation of alpha receptors was unmasked by propranolol.

Finally, the order of potency of agonists in stimulating coronary vascular beta receptors and the demonstration of selective beta receptor blockade with practolol suggest that beta receptors in coronary vessels resemble those in peripheral vessels more than those in myocardium.

Full text

PDF
279

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. ANTON A. H., SAYRE D. F. A study of the factors affecting the aluminum oxide-trihydroxyindole procedure for the analysis of catecholamines. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1962 Dec;138:360–375. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. BARDHANABAEDYA S., DENISON A. B., Jr, GREEN H. D. Adrenergic drugs and blockade on coronary arterioles and myocardial contraction. Circ Res. 1956 Nov;4(6):653–658. doi: 10.1161/01.res.4.6.653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. BERNE R. M., DEGEEST H., LEVY M. N. INFLUENCE OF THE CARDIAC NERVES ON CORONARY RESISTANCE. Am J Physiol. 1965 Apr;208:763–769. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1965.208.4.763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. BERNE R. M. Effect of epinephrine and norepinephrine on coronary circulation. Circ Res. 1958 Sep;6(5):644–655. doi: 10.1161/01.res.6.5.644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bussmann W. D., Rauh M., Krayenbuehl H. P. Coronary and hemodynamic effects of myocardio-selective beta-receptor blockade by ICI 50172 in the closed-chest dog. Differentiation of coronary and myocardial beta receptors. Am Heart J. 1970 Mar;79(3):347–360. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(70)90422-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dunlop D., Shanks R. G. Selective blockade of adrenoceptive beta receptors in the heart. Br J Pharmacol Chemother. 1968 Jan;32(1):201–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-5381.1968.tb00444.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Feigl E. O. Sympathetic control of coronary circulation. Circ Res. 1967 Feb;20(2):262–271. doi: 10.1161/01.res.20.2.262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Foster R. W. The pharmacology of pressor drugs. Br J Anaesth. 1966 Sep;38(9):690–704. doi: 10.1093/bja/38.9.690. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Furchgott R. F. The pharmacological differentiation of adrenergic receptors. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1967 Feb 10;139(3):553–570. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1967.tb41229.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. GRANATA L., OLSSON R. A., HUVOS A., GREGG D. E. CORONARY INFLOW AND OXYGEN USAGE FOLLOWING CARDIAC SYMPATHETIC NERVE STIMULATION IN UNANESTHETIZED DOGS. Circ Res. 1965 Feb;16:114–120. doi: 10.1161/01.res.16.2.114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. HAEGGENDAL J. AN IMPROVED METHOD FOR FLUORIMETRIC DETERMINATION OF SMALL AMOUNTS OF ADRENALINE AND NORADRENALINE IN PLASMA AND TISSUES. Acta Physiol Scand. 1963 Nov;59:242–254. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-1716.1963.tb02739.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. HARDIN R. A., SCOTT J. B., HADDY F. J. Effect of epinephrine and norepinephrine on coronary vascular resistance in dogs. Am J Physiol. 1961 Aug;201:276–280. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1961.201.2.276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. KLOCKE F. J., KAISER G. A., ROSS J., Jr, BRAUNWALD E. AN INTRINSIC ADRENERGIC VASODILATOR MECHANISM IN THE CORONARY VASCULAR BED OF THE DOG. Circ Res. 1965 Apr;16:376–382. doi: 10.1161/01.res.16.4.376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Lands A. M., Arnold A., McAuliff J. P., Luduena F. P., Brown T. G., Jr Differentiation of receptor systems activated by sympathomimetic amines. Nature. 1967 May 6;214(5088):597–598. doi: 10.1038/214597a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Lucchesi B. R., Hodgeman R. J. Effect of 4-(2-hydroxy-3-isopropylaminopropoxy) acetanilide (AY 21,011) on the myocardial and coronary vascular responses to adrenergic stimulation. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1971 Jan;176(1):200–211. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. McRaven D. R., Mark A. L., Abboud F. M., Mayer H. E. Responses of coronary vessels to adrenergic stimuli. J Clin Invest. 1971 Apr;50(4):773–778. doi: 10.1172/JCI106548. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Pitt B., Sugishita Y., Gregg D. E. Coronary hemodynamic effects of calcium in the unanesthetized dog. Am J Physiol. 1969 Jun;216(6):1456–1459. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1969.216.6.1456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Ross G., Jorgensen C. R. Effects of a cardio-selective beta-adrenergic blocking agent on the heart and coronary circulation. Cardiovasc Res. 1970 Apr;4(2):148–153. doi: 10.1093/cvr/4.2.148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. SCOTT J. B., FROHLICH E. D., HARDIN R. A., HADDY F. J. Na, K, Ca, and Mg ion action on coronary vascular resistance in the dog heart. Am J Physiol. 1961 Dec;201:1095–1100. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1961.201.6.1095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. ZUBERBUHLER R. C., BOHR D. F. RESPONSES OF CORONARY SMOOTH MUSCLE TO CATECHOLAMINES. Circ Res. 1965 May;16:431–440. doi: 10.1161/01.res.16.5.431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Investigation are provided here courtesy of American Society for Clinical Investigation

RESOURCES