4.5 Article

Uteroplacental insufficiency after bilateral uterine artery ligation in the rat: Impact on postnatal glucose and lipid metabolism and evidence for metabolic programming of the offspring by sham operation

期刊

ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 149, 期 3, 页码 1056-1063

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1210/en.2007-0891

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ligation of the uterine arteries (LIG) in rats serves as a model of intrauterine growth restriction and subsequent developmental programming of impaired glucose tolerance, hyperinsulinemia, and adiposity in the offspring. Its impact on lipid metabolism has been less well investigated. We compared parameters of glucose and lipid metabolism and glucocorticoid levels in the offspring of dams that underwent either LIG or sham operation (SOP) with those of untreated controls. Blood parameters including insulin, leptin, and visfatin as well as body weight, food intake, and creatinine clearance were recorded up to an age of 30 wk. Glucose tolerance tests were performed, and both leptin and visfatin expression in liver, muscle, and epididymal and mesenteric fat was quantified by RT-PCR. After catch-up growth, weight gain of all groups was similar, despite lower food intake of the LIG rats. LIG off-spring showed impaired glucose tolerance from the age of 15 wk as well as elevated glycosylated hemoglobin and corticosterone levels. However, the body fat content of both LIG and SOP animals increased relative to controls, and both showed elevated triglyceride, total cholesterol, and leptin levels as well as a reduced proportion of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Thus, use of the LIG model requires both SOP and untreated controls. Although only LIG is associated with impaired glucose tolerance, pathogenic programming of the lipid metabolism can also be induced by SOP. Visfatin does not appear to be involved in the disturbed glucose metabolism after intrauterine growth restriction and may represent only a marker of fat accumulation.

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