4.5 Article

Oral or Intraperitoneal Binge Drinking and Oxidative Balance in Adolescent Rats

期刊

CHEMICAL RESEARCH IN TOXICOLOGY
卷 27, 期 11, 页码 1926-1933

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/tx5002628

关键词

-

资金

  1. Andalusian Regional Government

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oxidative imbalance is one of the most important mechanisms of alcohol-induced injury. Acute alcohol exposure induces a significant amount of reactive oxygen species during its hepatic metabolism via the microsomal ethanol oxidizing system. During adolescence, the physiological development is still taking place; therefore, ethanol's effects differ in adolescents compared to that in adults. Because binge drinking is the most important model of ethanol intake used by adolescents and because little is known about its effects on the liver, we have used two routes of acute ethanol administration (oral and intraperitoneal) in adolescent rats in order to analyze the oxidative damage caused in the periphery and liver. Here, it has been demonstrated for the first time that binge drinking in adolescents causes peripheral oxidation of lipid and DNA as well as lipid and protein hepatic oxidation, which are related to lower glutathione peroxidise (GPx) activity, higher catalase (CAT) activity, and higher expression of NADPHoxidase, contributing to hepatic damage. In addition, it is shown that the intraperitoneal administration route results in increased oxidative damage, which is probably related to the resulting general stress response that causes higher DNA and protein oxidation due to higher NADPHoxidase expression and higher CAT and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities. According to these results, it is concluded that binge drinking induces hepatic damage during adolescence, at least in part, as consequence of oxidative stress because the antioxidant response was insufficient to avoid liver oxidation. Alcohol administered intraperitoneally provoked more DNA oxidation than that from the oral alcohol exposure 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

4.5
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