Angiotensin II receptors involved in the enhancement of noradrenergic transmission in the caudal artery of the spontaneously hypertensive rat

1 The effects of the AT 1 receptor antagonist losartan and the AT 2 receptor antagonist PD 123319, on actions of angiotensin II in isolated caudal arteries of spontaneously hypertensive (SH) and age‐matched normotensive (Wistar‐Kyoto) rats were compared. 2 Angiotensin II (0.1–3 μ m ) produced concentration‐dependent increases in perfusion pressure in artery preparations from both SH and Wistar‐Kyoto (WKY) rats, the maximal increase in the SH rat being significantly greater than the increase in WKY rats. The increase in perfusion pressure in preparations from both strains of rats was prevented by losartan (0.1 μ m ) and unaffected by PD 123319 (0.1 μ m ), indicating that the vasoconstrictor action of angiotensin II is subserved by AT 1 receptors. 3 Angiotensin II (0.1–3 μ m ) produced concentration‐dependent enhancement of both stimulation‐induced (S‐I) efflux of [ 3 H]‐noradrenaline and stimulation‐evoked vasoconstrictor responses in isolated preparations of caudal artery from both SH and WKY rats, in which the noradrenergic transmitter stores had been labelled with [ 3 H]‐noradrenaline. The maximum enhancement of S‐I efflux produced by angiotensin II (1 μ m ) was significantly greater in artery preparations from WKY rats than in preparations from SH rats, whereas the maximum enhancement of stimulation‐evoked vasoconstrictor responses was greater in preparations from SH rats than in those from WKY rats. 4 In artery preparations from both WKY and SH rats, the AT 2 angiotensin II receptor antagonist, losartan (0.01 and 0.1 μ m ), reduced or abolished the enhancement of both S‐I efflux and vasoconstrictor responses by 1 μ m angiotensin II. 5 The combination of 0.01 μ m losartan and 0.1 μ m angiotensin II enhanced both the S‐I efflux and stimulation‐evoked vasoconstrictor response in caudal artery preparations from WKY rats, whereas 0.1 μ m angiotensin alone was ineffective. The AT 2 receptor antagonist PD 123319 (0.01 and 0.1 μ m ) prevented the enhancement of both S‐I efflux and stimulation‐evoked vasoconstrictor responses by the combination of angiotensin II and losartan. 6 In contrast to findings in WKY preparations and those previously obtained for arteries from another normotensive strain (Sprague‐Dawley), in artery preparations from SH rats there was no synergistic interaction between losartan and angiotensin II. Rather, combinations of 0.1 μ m angiotensin II and PD 123319 (both 0.01 and 0.1 μ m ) enhanced S‐I [ 3 H]‐noradrenahne efflux, whereas 0.1 μ m angiotensin II alone was without effect. Moreover, losartan (0.1 μ m ) prevented the enhancement of S‐I efflux by the combination of angiotensin II and PD 123319. 7 The present findings indicate that in the caudal artery of WKY and SH rats, and as previously found in Sprague‐Dawley preparations, angiotensin II receptors similar to the AT 1B subtype subserve enhancement of transmitter noradrenaline release. 8 As previously suggested for Sprague‐Dawley caudal artery preparations, the synergistic prejunctional interaction of losartan and 0.1 μ m angiotensin II in caudal artery preparations from WKY rats may be due to either the unmasking by losartan of a latent population of angiotensin II receptors subserving facilitation of transmitter noradrenaline release, or blockade by losartan of an inhibitory action of angiotensin II on transmitter release. 9 The synergistic interaction of PD 123319 and 0.1 μ m angiotensin II in caudal arteries of SH rats may also be explained by either of the mechanisms proposed for the normotensive strains, but the involvement of different receptor subtypes would need to be postulated for each of the proposed mechanisms.