Advertisement

Shear Stress and Endothelial Cell Retention in Critical Lower Limb Ischemia

  • Caroline Jadlowiec
  • Alan DardikEmail author
Chapter
  • 1.2k Downloads

Abstract

Progressive atherosclerotic stenosis of vessels commonly leads to the development of critical limb and myocardial ischemia. When possible and appropriate, surgical revascularization is attempted, and it is here that we clinically observe the pathological processes of ischemia and reperfusion and their complex effects [1]. Understanding of the role and function of the vascular endothelium has undergone significant changes over the past several decades. In the 1960s Willms-Kretschmer and colleagues referred to altered endothelial cells as being activated and, in doing so, implied a functional consequence to the altered cell morphology [2, 3]. This dynamic view of the endothelium, however, did not ensue into the following decade when, again, it was believed that endothelial cells were nothing more than a passive barrier. It would not be until the 1980s that Pober and colleagues would reexamine the scientific principle and ultimately prove that the vascular endothelium is both dynamic and integral to vascular and systemic equilibrium [4]. The scientific process to better understand the endothelium dates back to the 1800s when von Recklinghausen recognized that vessels were not merely inert tunnels passing through tissue, but living entities lined by cells [5]. The endothelial monolayer comprises the entirety of the vascular system, and it is now recognized that the diversity of these cells is not merely limited by cell type alone, but rather is a function of anatomic hemodynamic variation. The unique interface formed by the endothelium between blood and the surrounding vessel wall allows it to function as a primary mediator in response to shear stress alterations.

Keywords

Vein Graft Critical Limb Ischemia Fluid Shear Stress Primary Patency Graft Patency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Verrier ED, Boyle Jr EM. Endothelial cell injury in cardiovascular surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1996;62(3):915–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Willms-Kretchmer K, Flax MH, Cotran RS. The fine structure of the vascular response in haptan-specific delayed hypersensitivity and contact dermatitis. Lab Invest. 1967;17(3):334–49.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pober JS. Warner-Lambert/Parke-Davis award lecture. Cytokine-mediated activation of vascular endothelium. Physiology and pathology. Am J Pathol. 1988;133(3):426–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bevilacqua MP, Pober JS, Wheeler ME. Interleukin 1 acts on cultured human vascular endothelium to increase the adhesion of polymorphonuclear leukocytes, monocytes, and related leukocyte cell lines. J Clin Invest. 1985;76:2003–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cines DB, Pollak ES, Buck CA, et al. Endothelial cells in physiology and in the pathophysiology of vascular disorders. Blood. 1998;91(10):3527–61.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paszkowiak JJ, Dardik A. Arterial wall shear stress: observations from the bench to the bedside. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2003;37(1):47–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dardik A, Chen L, Frattini J, et al. Differential effects of orbital and laminar shear stress on endothelial cells. J Vasc Surg. 2005;41(5):869–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies PF. Flow-mediated endothelial mechanotransduction. Physiol Rev. 1995;75(3):519–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flaherty JT, Pierce JE, Ferrans VJ, et al. Endothelial nuclear patterns in the canine arterial tree with particular reference to hemodynamic events. Circ Res. 1972;30(1):23–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Resnick N, Gimbrone MA. Hemodynamic forces are complex regulators of endothelial gene expression. FASEB J. 1995;9(10):874–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Malek AM, Alper AL, Izumo S. Hemodynamic shear stress and its role in atherosclerosis. JAMA. 1999;282(21):2035–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Caplan BA, Schwartz CJ. Increased endothelial cell turnover in areas of in vivo Evans blue uptake in the pig aorta. Atherosclerosis. 1973;17:401–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cunningham KS, Gotlieb AI. The role of shear stress in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Lab Invest. 2005;85:9–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gimbrone Jr MA, Nagel T, Topper JN. Biomechanical activation: an emerging paradigm in endothelial adhesion biology. J Clin Invest. 1997;99(8):1809–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gimbrone MA, Topper JN, Nagel T, et al. Endothelial dysfunction, hemodynamic forces, and atherogenesis Atherosclerosis V: the Fifth Saratoga Conference. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000;902:230–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Verrier ED, Morgan EN. Endothelial response to cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;66(S1):S17–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ten VS, Pinsky DJ. Endothelial response to hypoxia: physiologic adaptation and pathologic dysfunction. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2002;8(3):242–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ratych RE, Chuknyiska RS, Bulkley GB. The primary localization of free radical generation after anoxia/reoxygenation in isolated endothelial cells. Surgery. 1987;102(2):122–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Braunersreuther V, Jaquet V. Reactive oxygen species in myocardial reperfusion injury: from physiopathology to therapeutic approaches. Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2012;13(1):97–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kerrigan CL, Stotland MA. Ischemia reperfusion injury: a review. Microsurgery. 1993;14(3):165–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cooley BC. History of vein grafting. Microsurgery. 1998;18(4):234–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ke Q, Costa M. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1). Mol Pharmacol. 2006;70(5):1469–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pugh CW, Ratcliffe PJ. Regulation of angiogenesis by hypoxia: role of the HIF system. Nat Med. 2003;9:677–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Manalo JD, Rowan A, Lavoie T, et al. Transcriptional regulation of vascular endothelial cell responses to hypoxia by HIF-1. Blood. 2005;105(2):659–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other disease. Nature. 2000;407:249–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buschmann I, Schaper W. The pathophysiology of the collateral circulation (arteriogenesis). J Pathol. 2000;190(3):338–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schaper W, Scholz D. Factors regulation arteriogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2003;23(7):1143–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Murray CD. The physiological principle of minimum work applied to the angle of branching of arteries. J Gen Physiol. 1926;9(6):835–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Grundmann S, Piek JJ, Pasterkamp G, et al. Arteriogenesis: basic mechanisms and therapeutic stimulation. Eur J Clin Invest. 2007;37(10):755–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pipp F, Boehm S, Cai WJ, et al. Elevated fluid shear stress enhances postocclusive collateral artery growth and gene expression in the pig hind limb. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2004;24(9):1664–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Heil M, Eitenmüller I, Schmitz-Rixen T. Arteriogenesis versus angiogenesis: similarities and differences. J Cell Mol Med. 2006;10(1):45–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kunlin J. Le traitement de l’arterite obliterante par la greffe veineuse. Arch Mal Coeur. 1949;42:371–2.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dobrin PB, Littooy FN, Golan J, et al. Mechanical and histologic changes in canine vein grafts. J Surg Res. 1988;44(3):259–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Krupski W, Thal ER, Gewertz BL, et al. Endothelial response to venous injury. Am Med Assoc. 1979;114(11):1240–8.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Owens CD, Wake N, Jacot JG, et al. Early biomechanical changes in lower extremity vein grafts–distinct temporal phases of remodeling and wall stiffness. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44(4):740–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Owens CD, Rybicki FJ, Wake N. Early remodeling of lower extremity vein grafts: inflammation influences biomechanical adaptation. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47(6):1235–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Golledge J, Turner RJ, Harley SL, et al. Circumferential deformation and shear stress induce differential responses in saphenous vein endothelium exposed to arterial flow. J Clin Invest. 1997;99(11):2719–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nadaud S, Philippe M, Arnal JF, et al. Sustained increase in aortic endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression in vivo in a model of chronic high blood flow. Circ Res. 1996;79:857–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Guzman RJ, Abe K, Zarins CK. Flow-induced arterial enlargement is inhibited by suppression of nitric oxide synthase activity in vivo. Surgery. 1997;122:273–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kraiss LW, Geary RL, Mattsson EJ, et al. Acute reductions in blood flow and shear stress induce platelet-derived growth factor-A expression in baboon prosthetic grafts. Circ Res. 1996;79:45–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mondy JS, Lindner V, Miyashiro JK, et al. Platelet-derived growth factor ligand and receptor expression in response to altered blood flow in vivo. Circ Res. 1997;81:320–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Masser PA, Taylor LM, Moneta GL, et al. Technique of reversed vein bypass for lower extremity ischemia. Ann Vasc Surg. 1996;10(2):190–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    McCaughan Jr JJ, Walsh DB, Edgcomb LP, et al. In vitro observations of greater saphenous vein valves during pulsatile and nonpulsatile flow and following lysis. J Vasc Surg. 1984;1(2):356–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Vesti BR, Primozich J, Bergelin RO, et al. Follow-up of valves in saphenous vein bypass grafts with duplex ultrasonography. J Vasc Surg. 2001;33(2):369–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Quist WC, LoGerfo FW. Prevention of smooth muscle cell phenotypic modulation in vein grafts: a hitomorphometric study. J Vasc Surg. 1992;16(2):225–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ku DN, Klafta JM, Gewertz BL, et al. The contribution of valves to saphenous vein graft resistance. J Vasc Surg. 1987;6:274–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chin AK, Mayer DN, Goldman RK, et al. The effect of valvulotomy on flow rate through the saphenous vein graft: clinical implications. J Vasc Surg. 1988;8(3):316–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    May AG, DeWeese JA, Rob CG. Arterialization in situ saphenous vein. Arch Surg. 1965;91(5):743–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Souza SRD, Bomfim V, Skoglund H, et al. Early patency of saphenous vein graft for coronary artery bypass harvested with surrounding tissue. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;71:797–800.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Stefanadis C, Vlachopoulos C, Karayannacos P, et al. Effect of vasa vasorum flow on structure and function of the aorta in experimental animals. Circulation. 1995;91:2669–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gossl M, Versari D, Lerman LO, et al. Low vasa vasorum densities correlate with inflammation and subintimal thickening: potential role in location—determination of atherogenesis. Atherosclerosis. 2009;206:362–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Conte MS, Bandyk DK, Clowed AW, et al. Results of PREVENT III: a multicenter, randomized trial of edifoligide for the prevention of vein graft failure in lower extremity bypass surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43(4):742–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Schanzer A, Hevelone N, Owens CD, et al. Technical factors affecting autogenous vein graft failure: observations from a large multicenter trial. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46(6):1180–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Voorhees AB, Jaretzki A, Blakemore AH. The use of tubes constructed from vinyon “N” cloth in bridging arterial defects: a preliminary. Ann Surg. 1952;135(3):332–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kapadia MR, Popowich DA, Kibbe MR. Modified prosthetic vascular conduits. Circulation. 2008;117(14):1873–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Quarmby JW, Burnand KG, Lockhart SJM, et al. Prospective randomized trial of woven versus collagen¯impregnated knitted prosthetic Dacron grafts in aortoiliac surgery. Br J Surg. 1998;85(6):775–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Guidoin R, Gosselin C, Domurado D. Dacron as arterial prosthetic material: nature, properties, brands, fate and perspectives. Biomater Med Devices Artif Organs. 1977;5(2):177–203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Soyer T, Lempinen M, Cooper P, et al. A new venous prosthesis. Surgery. 1972;72(6):864–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Campbell CD, Brooks DH, Webster MW. The use of expanded microporous polytetrafluoroethylene for limb salvage: a preliminary report. Surgery. 1976;79(5):485–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Blumenberg RM, Anderson JM, Gelfand ML, et al. Histologic evaluation of Dacron® and PTFE graft material explanted from humans after 4 to 20 years in vivo. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2000;34(6):505–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Heyligers JMM, Lisman T, Weeterings C, et al. Heparin immobilization reduces thrombogenicity on small-caliber ePTFE grafts. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43(3):587–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lin PH, Chen C, Bush RL, et al. Small-caliber heparincoated ePTFE grafts reduce platelet deposition and neointimal hyperplasia in a baboon model. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39(6):1322–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hugl B, Nevelsteen A, Daenens K, et al. PEPE II-a multicenter study with an end-point heparin-bonded expanded polytetrafluoroethylene vascular graft for above and below knee bypass surgery: determinants of patency. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;50(2):195–203.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Post S, Kraus T, Muller-Reinartz U, et al. Dacron vs polytetrafluoroethylene grafts for femoropopliteal bypass: a prospective randomised multicentre trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2001;22(3):226–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Stump MM, Jordan GL, DeBakey ME, et al. Endothelium grown from circulating blood on isolated intravascular Dacron hub. Am J Pathol. 1963;43(3):361–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Berger K, Sauvage LR, Rao AM, et al. Healing of arterial prostheses in man: its incompleteness. Ann Surg. 1972;175(1):118–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Herring MB, Dilley R, Jersild RA. Seeding arterial prostheses with vascular endothelium. The nature of the lining. Ann Surg. 1979;190(1):84–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Stanley JC, Burkel WE, Ford JW, et al. Enhanced patency of small-diameter, externally supported Dacron iliofemoral grafts seeded with endothelial cells. Surgery. 1982;92(6):994–1005.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Smyth JV, Welch M, Carr HMH, et al. Fibrinolysis profiles and platelet activation after endothelial cell seeding of prosthetic vascular grafts. Ann Vasc Surg. 1995;9(6):542–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Rosenman JE, Kempczinski RF, Pearce WH, et al. Kinetics of endothelial cell seeding. J Vasc Surg. 1985;2(6):778–84.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zilla P. In vitro endothelialization: its contribution towards an ideal vascular replacement. Madame Curie Bioscience Database [Internet]. Austin: Landes Bioscience; 2000.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Radomski JS, Jarrell BE, Williams SK, et al. Initial adherence of human capillary endothelial cells to Dacron. J Surg Res. 1987;42(2):133–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Foxall TL, Auger KR, Callow AD, et al. Adult human ­endothelial cell coverage of small-caliber Dacron and polytetrafluoroethylene vascular prostheses in vitro. J Surg Res. 1986;41(2):158–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ott MJ, Ballermann BJ. Shear stress-conditioned, endothelial cell-seeded vascular grafts: improved cell adherence in response to in vitro shear stress. Surgery. 1995;117(3):334–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Dardik A, Liu A, Ballermann BJ. Chronic in vitro shear stress stimulates endothelial cell retention on prosthetic vascular grafts and reduces subsequent in vivo neointimal thickness. J Vasc Surg. 1999;29(1):157–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Herring M, Gardner A, Glover J. Seeding human arterial prostheses with mechanically derived endothelium: the detrimental effect of smoking. J Vasc Surg. 1984;1(2):279–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Herring MH, Comiton RS, Legrand DR, et al. Endothelial seeding of polytetrafluoroethylene popliteal bypasses: a preliminary report. J Vasc Surg. 1987;6(2):114–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Deutsch M, Meinhart J, Fischlein T, et al. Clinical autologous in vitro endothelialization of infrainguinal ePTFE grafts in 100 patients: a 9-year experience. Surgery. 1999;126(5):847–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Deutsch M, Meinhart J, Zilla P, et al. Long-term experience in autologous in vitro endothelialization of infrainguinal ePTFE grafts. J Vasc Surg. 2009;49(2):352–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery and the Interdepartmental Program in Vascular Biology and TherapeuticsYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.VA Connecticut Healthcare SystemWest HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations