4.5 Article

Effect of crystallization inhibitors on vascular calcifications induced by vitamin D -: A pilot study in Sprague-Dawley rats

期刊

CIRCULATION JOURNAL
卷 71, 期 7, 页码 1152-1156

出版社

JAPANESE CIRCULATION SOC
DOI: 10.1253/circj.71.1152

关键词

crystallization inhibitors; etidronate; phytate; vascular calcification; vitamin D

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Pathological calcification in soft tissues (ie, ectopic calcification) can have severe consequences. Hydroxyapatite is the common mineral phase present in all tissue calcifications. In general, the development of tissue calcifications requires a pre-existing injury as an inducer (heterogeneous nucleant), whereas further progression requires the presence of other promoter factors (such as hypercalcemia and/or hyperphosphatemia) and/or a deficiency in calcification repressor factors (crystallization inhibitors and cellular defense mechanisms). The present study investigated the capacity of etidronate (a bisphosphonate used in osteoporosis treatment) and phytate (a natural product) to inhibit vascular calcification in rats. Methods and Results Six male Sprague-Dawley rats in each of the 3 treatment groups were subcutaneously injected with either a placebo (physiological serum solution), etidronate (0.825 mu mol(.)kg(-1) (.) day(-1)) or phytate (0.825 mu mol (.) kg(-1 .) day(-1)) for 8 days. Four days into this regimen, calcinosis was induced by subcutaneous injections of 500,000 IU/kg vitamin D at 0 h, 24 h and 48 h. Ninety-six hours after the final vitamin D injection, the rats were killed and aortas and their hearts were removed for histological and calcium analyses. The data showed that phytate-treated rats had lower levels of aortic calcium than placebo-treated rats. All groups had similar heart calcium levels. Conclusions The present study found that phytate acted as a vascular calcification inhibitor. Thus, the action of polyphosphates could be important in protecting against vascular calcification.

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

4.5
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