Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 11;175(22):4266–4280. doi: 10.1111/bph.14492

Table 2.

Basic parameters for vascular studies

Vessel diameter prior to constriction (μm) Vessel diameter post constriction (μm) ET‐1 needed to achieve desired constriction (nM)
Mean SEM n Mean SEM n Mean SEM n
Control 111.2 15.6 6 62.1 6.2 6 0.25 0.05 6
L‐NAME 86.9 11.5 7 59.5 5.4 7 0.15 0.04 7
Peg‐Cat 122.4 8.5 6 58.4 6.6 6 0.28 0.06 6
LPA 181.4 16.3 10 106.3 11.0 10 0.39 0.06 10
LPA + L‐NAME 184.9 22.9 7 121.3 20.6 7 0.48* 0.12 7
LPA + Peg‐Cat 165.3 11.8 7 74.6 5.9 7 0.31 0.06 7
SNP Control 123.3 8.8 6 62.8 6.3 6 0.39 0.09 6
SNP + LPA 130.9 9.0 5 61.0 8.9 5 0.40 0.05 5
Ach control 135.0 18.0 5 70.0 9.0 5 0.27 0.04 5
Ach + LPA 109.5 20.0 5 58.1 11.5 5 0.15 0.03 5
Ki16425 + LPA 165.1 12.5 6 90.8 9.5 6 0.54* 0.11 6
Ki16425 + LPA + L‐NAME 133.4 13.8 7 86.0 13.0 7 0.39* 0.04 7
Ki16425 + LPA + Peg‐Cat 122.8 10.7 7 71.5 8.2 7 0.41 0.04 7
H2L5186303 + LPA 117.7 14.6 6 76.5 9.7 6 0.48* 0.08 6
H2L5186303 + LPA + L‐NAME 123.6 14.7 6 73.0 10.4 6 0.30 0.07 6
H2L5186303 + LPA + Peg‐Cat 145.9 22.0 6 82.4 13.3 6 0.43 0.11 6
Rotenone + LPA 115.7 4.7 7 68.4 5.4 7 0.52 0.08 7

Mean diameter prior to constriction, post constriction and concentration of ET‐1 needed to achieve desired constriction across all vascular experiments. n = number of patients. Comparisons were made between studies without LPA (greyed out) and corresponding studies with LPA + intervention.

*

P < 0.05 for L‐NAME versus LPA + L‐NAME, control versus Ki16425 + LPA, L‐NAME versus Ki16425 + LPA + L‐NAME, control versus H2L5186303 + LPA, L‐NAME versus H2L5186303 + LPA + L‐NAME.