4.7 Article

Does Deoxynivalenol Affect Amoxicillin and Doxycycline Absorption in the Gastrointestinal Tract? Ex Vivo Study on Swine Jejunum Mucosa Explants

期刊

TOXINS
卷 14, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins14110743

关键词

deoxynivalenol; amoxicillin; doxycycline; Ussing chamber; swine jejunum mucosa explants

资金

  1. National Science Centre Poland [UMO2016/23/B/N27/02273]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the effects of deoxynivalenol (DON) on the absorption of the commonly used antibiotics amoxicillin (AMX) and doxycycline (DOX) in pigs. Results showed that DON increased intestinal permeability, accelerated DOX transport, but did not affect AMX transport.
The presence of deoxynivalenol (DON) in feed may increase intestinal barrier permeability. Disturbance of the intestinal barrier integrity may affect the absorption of antibiotics used in animals. Since the bioavailability of orally administered antibiotics significantly affects their efficacy and safety, it was decided to evaluate how DON influences the absorption of the most commonly used antibiotics in pigs, i.e., amoxicillin (AMX) and doxycycline (DOX). The studies were conducted using jejunal explants from adult pigs. Explants were incubated in Ussing chambers, in which a buffer containing DON (30 mu g/mL), AMX (50 mu g/mL), DOX (30 mu g/mL), a combination of AMX + DON, or a combination of DOX + DON was used. Changes in transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER), the flux of transcellular and intracellular transport markers, and the flux of antibiotics across explants were measured. DON increased the permeability of small intestine explants, expressed by a reduction in TEER and an intensification of transcellular marker transport. DON did not affect AMX transport, but it accelerated DOX transport by approximately five times. The results suggest that DON inhibits the efflux transport of DOX to the intestinal lumen, and thus significantly changes its absorption from the gastrointestinal tract.

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

4.7
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