3.9 Article

Adverse effects of arsenic exposure on uterine function and structure in female rat

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL AND TOXICOLOGIC PATHOLOGY
卷 62, 期 4, 页码 451-459

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.etp.2009.07.008

关键词

Sodium arsenite; Rat; Endometrium; Uterine gland; Uterine; Epithelium; Steroid hormones; FSH; LH

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present investigation examined the adverse effects of arsenic exposure on uterine function and structure of female rat at 56 days of age, exposed to different doses (50, 100, and 200 ppm) of sodium arsenite in drinking water at immature age (28 days) for 28 days. Dose-dependent decrease (P<0.001) was observed in mean uterine weight and length in all treated groups compared to control. Higher arsenic deposition was found in uterine tissue against increased doses of arsenite. Arsenite treatment altered the histomormphology of the uterus. Uterine epithelium in 50 ppm group was lined by cuboidal cells instead of columnar cells observed in control epithelium. In 100 and 200 ppm groups, no demarcation was observed between epithelial cells and endometrial stroma. No basement membrane was seen in these groups; even in 50 ppm, basement membrane was disturbed. The endometrial stroma in 100 and 200 ppm groups was very dense in appearance and contained irregular-shaped cells. In myometrium, loosening of cells was observed in 100 and 200 ppm groups. Dose-dependent decrease (P<0.001) was observed in mean uterine diameter, epithelial height, thickness of endometrium, myometrium, and in plasma levels of estradiol, progesterone, FSH and LH in all the treatment groups compared to control. In summary, arsenic is a major threat to female reproductive health acting as a reproductive toxicant and as an endocrine disruptor, restricted the function and structure of uterus, by altering the gonadotrophins and steroid levels, not only at high dose concentration but also at low (50 ppm) levels, when they become mature. (C) 2009 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

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

3.9
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