4.2 Article

Long-term administration of highly purified eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester improves blood coagulation abnormalities and dysfunction of vascular endothelial cells in Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty rats

期刊

ENDOCRINE JOURNAL
卷 50, 期 5, 页码 603-611

出版社

JAPAN ENDOCRINE SOCIETY
DOI: 10.1507/endocrj.50.603

关键词

blood coagulation; vascular endothelial/smooth muscle cells; eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester; Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty rats

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the effect of highly purified eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester (EPA-E) on blood coagulation abnormalities and dysfunction of vascular endothelial cells in spontaneously diabetic Otsuka Long-Evans Tokushima Fatty rats. The animals were treated with either EPA-E or lard at a daily dose of 0.3 g/kg/day for 52 weeks by gavage, and their coagulation/fibrinolytic parameters, platelet aggregation, and functions of the vascular endothelial cells were examined. EPA-E significantly improved coagulation-related parameters including prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, fibrinogen level, and activities of factor II, V, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, and XII, and antithrombin III, and fibrinolysis-related parameters including plasminogen, tissue-type plasminogen activator, alpha(2)-plasmin inhibitor, and plasminogen activator inhibitor. It also suppressed ADP- or collagen-induced platelet aggregation and the cholesterol/phospholipid molar ratio in platelet membranes at a dose of 0.3 g/kg. In addition, it significantly increased the migration activity of vascular endothelial cells, and decreased the binding of vascular endothelial cells to vascular endothelial growth factor. In contrast, lard had no effect on hypercoagulation, hypofibrinolysis, and platelet hyperaggregation but significantly aggravated the dysfunction of vascular endothelial cells. These data demonstrate that EPA-E beneficially altered certain factors known to promote thrombosis and atherosclerosis in this animal model.

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

4.2
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