Literature DB >> 17869075

Regenerative capacity differs between micro- and macrovesicular hepatic steatosis.

Agnieszka Oleszczuk1, Michael Spannbauer, Andrea Tannapfel, Matthias Blüher, Jan Hengstler, Uta-Carolin Pietsch, Annette Schuhmacher, Christian Wittekind, Johann P Hauss, Michael R Schön.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Independent of etiology, the hepatic microvesicular steatosis has a worse prognosis compared with macrovesicular steatosis. Proliferation compensates for apoptosis and reflects regenerative mechanisms following liver injury. It is unknown whether these two types of fatty liver have differences in regenerative capacity and apoptosis, which could have an impact on their prognosis.
METHODS: Two groups of pigs were studied for 72 days under a protein-deficient diet. One group received only protein-deficient diet (n=6), the other was treated in addition to the diet with 6g ethanol/kg/day by means of a percutaneous intragastric catheter (n=6). The rate of proliferating and apoptotic hepatocytes was determined, respectively, by proliferation cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) and ISEL/TUNEL staining for apoptosis in liver biopsies with similar steatosis grade in pigs with micro- or macrovesicular fatty liver.
RESULTS: The ethanol-treated group developed microvesicular steatosis, the other group developed macrovesicular steatosis. Proliferation index was significantly increased in macrovesicular in comparison with microvesicular steatosis (p<0.05). Apoptosis rate was similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Regeneration, but not apoptosis rate differs between micro- and macrovesicular steatosis. The reduced regenerative capacity in microvesicular steatosis may contribute to the worse prognosis of this subtype of fatty liver disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17869075     DOI: 10.1016/j.etp.2007.05.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Toxicol Pathol        ISSN: 0940-2993


  6 in total

1.  Chronic Alcohol Consumption Causes Liver Injury in High-Fructose-Fed Male Mice Through Enhanced Hepatic Inflammatory Response.

Authors:  Ming Song; Theresa Chen; Russell A Prough; Matthew C Cave; Craig J McClain
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 3.455

2.  Phosphatidylcholine transfer protein/StarD2 promotes microvesicular steatosis and liver injury in murine experimental steatohepatitis.

Authors:  Hayley T Nicholls; Jason L Hornick; David E Cohen
Journal:  Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol       Date:  2017-04-06       Impact factor: 4.052

3.  Influence of chemotherapy on liver regeneration induced by portal vein embolization or first hepatectomy of a staged procedure for colorectal liver metastases.

Authors:  Kuniya Tanaka; Takafumi Kumamoto; Ryusei Matsuyama; Kazuhisa Takeda; Yasuhiko Nagano; Itaru Endo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Comparison of free fructose and glucose to sucrose in the ability to cause fatty liver.

Authors:  Laura G Sánchez-Lozada; Wei Mu; Carlos Roncal; Yuri Y Sautin; Manal Abdelmalek; Sirirat Reungjui; MyPhuong Le; Takahiko Nakagawa; Hui Y Lan; Xuequing Yu; Richard J Johnson
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2009-07-22       Impact factor: 5.614

5.  Role of pregnane X receptor in obesity and glucose homeostasis in male mice.

Authors:  Krisstonia Spruiell; Ricardo M Richardson; John M Cullen; Emmanuel M Awumey; Frank J Gonzalez; Maxwell A Gyamfi
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  Chemical imaging on liver steatosis using synchrotron infrared and ToF-SIMS microspectroscopies.

Authors:  François Le Naour; Marie-Pierre Bralet; Delphine Debois; Christophe Sandt; Catherine Guettier; Paul Dumas; Alain Brunelle; Olivier Laprévote
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.