4.6 Article

Animal models of NASH: Getting both pathology and metabolic context right

期刊

JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 23, 期 11, 页码 1635-1648

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2008.05543.x

关键词

hepatic steatosis; high-fat diet; metabolic syndrome; non-alcoholic fatty liver disease; overnutrition

资金

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [358398]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common cause of referral to liver clinics, and its progressive form, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), can lead to cirrhosis and end-stage liver disease. The main risk factors for NAFLD/NASH are the metabolic abnormalities commonly observed in metabolic syndrome: insulin resistance, visceral obesity, dyslipidemia and altered adipokine profile. At present, the causes of progression from NAFLD to NASH remain poorly defined, and research in this area has been limited by the availability of suitable animal models of this disease. In the past, the main models used to investigate the pathogenesis of steatohepatitis have either failed to reproduce the full spectrum of liver pathology that characterizes human NASH, or the liver pathology has developed in a metabolic context that is not representative of the human condition. In the last few years, a number of models have been described in which the full spectrum of liver pathology develops in an appropriate metabolic context. In general, the underlying cause of metabolic defects in these models is chronic caloric overconsumption, also known as overnutrition. Overnutrition has been achieved in a number of different ways, including forced feeding, administration of high-fat diets, the use of genetically hyperphagic animals, or a combination of these approaches. The purpose of the present review is to critique the liver pathology and metabolic abnormalities present in currently available animal models of NASH, with particular focus on models described in approximately the last 5 years.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据