| Literature DB >> 27073396 |
Karina Bortolin Lodi1, Adriana Mathias Pereira da Silva Marchini1, Ana Maria do Espírito Santo2, Sigmar de Mello Rode3, Leonardo Marchini4, Rosilene Fernandes da Rocha1.
Abstract
Deficiency of sex hormones and excessive alcohol consumption are factors that have been related to alterations in the pattern of bone mineralization and osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate possible alterations in the calcium/phosphorus (Ca/P) ratio in the femur of rats subjected to sex hormone deficiency and/or alcohol consumption. Methods. Female and male Wistar rats (n = 108) were divided into ovariectomized (Ovx), orchiectomized (Orx), or sham-operated groups and subdivided according to diet: alcoholic diet (20% alcohol solution), isocaloric diet, and ad libitum diet. The diets were administered for 8 weeks. The Ca/P ratio in the femur was analyzed by energy dispersive micro-X-ray spectrometer (μEDX). Results. Consumption of alcohol reduced the Ca/P ratio in both females and males. The isocaloric diet reduced the Ca/P ratio in females. In groups with the ad libitum diet, the deficiency of sex hormones did not change the Ca/P ratio in females or males. However, the combination of sex hormone deficiency and alcoholic diet presented the lowest values for the Ca/P ratio in both females and males. Conclusions. There was a reduced Ca/P ratio in the femur of rats that consumed alcohol, which was exacerbated when combined with a deficiency of sex hormones.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27073396 PMCID: PMC4814668 DOI: 10.1155/2016/3797139
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Endocrinol ISSN: 1687-8337 Impact factor: 3.257
Description of the experimental groups.
| Group number | Group name (short form) | Gender | Surgery | Diet |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 | f-ovx-alc | Female | Ovariectomy | Alcoholic |
| G2 | f-ovx-iso | Female | Ovariectomy | Isocaloric |
| G3 | f-ovx-ad | Female | Ovariectomy |
|
| G4 | f-sham-alc | Female | Sham | Alcoholic |
| G5 | f-sham-iso | Female | Sham | Isocaloric |
| G6 | f-sham-ad | Female | Sham |
|
| G7 | m-orx-alc | Male | Orchiectomy | Alcoholic |
| G8 | m-orx-iso | Male | Orchiectomy | Isocaloric |
| G9 | m-orx-ad | Male | Orchiectomy |
|
| G10 | m-sham-alc | Male | Sham | Alcoholic |
| G11 | m-sham-iso | Male | Sham | Isocaloric |
| G12 | m-sham-ad | Male | Sham |
|
Figure 1Weight changes (%): the graph illustrates the values of the averages (bars) and standard deviations (lines superimposing the bars). Statistical comparisons are summarized as follows: females: comparison between most of the groups showed no significant differences (NS). Statistical significances (p < 0.05) (∗) were observed in the following groups: G1/G3 (∗); G2/G3 (∗); G4/G3 (∗); G5/G3 (∗). Males: comparison between most of the groups showed no significant differences (NS). Statistical significances (p < 0.05) (∗) were observed in the following groups: G9/G7 (∗); G9/G8 (∗); G9/G11 (∗); G12/G7 (∗); G12/G8 (∗); G12/G11 (∗).
Total caloric intake, alcohol intake, water, and feed efficiency.
| Group | Total caloric intake (kcal) | Alcohol intake (kcal) | Water (mL) | Feed efficiency (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 (f-ovx-alc) | 64.31 | 18.40 | 12.99 | 21.61 |
| G2 (f-ovx-iso) | 58.31 | — | 27.13 | 29.65 |
| G3 (f-ovx-ad) | 66.19 | — | 25.0 | 46.61 |
| G4 (f-sham-alc) | 65.70 | 19.41 | 13.71 | 24.25 |
| G5 (f-sham-iso) | 57.76 | — | 28.24 | 19.22 |
| G6 (f-sham-ad) | 60.37 | — | 32.00 | 33.03 |
| G7 (m-orx-alc) | 70.11 | 20.71 | 16.57 | −3.85 |
| G8 (m-orx-iso) | 69.32 | — | 36.19 | −4.73 |
| G9 (m-orx-ad) | 90.34 | — | 39.70 | 10.23 |
| G10 (m-sham-alc) | 80.93 | 19.63 | 15.70 | 8.11 |
| G11 (m-sham-iso) | 72.17 | — | 33.90 | −3.33 |
| G12 (m-sham-ad) | 105.83 | — | 43.04 | 17.08 |
Figure 2Ca (%): the graph illustrates the values of the averages (bars) and standard deviations (lines superimposing the bars). Statistical comparisons are summarized as follows: females: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed in the following groups: G2/G6 (NS); G4/G5 (NS). Males: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed in the following groups: G9/G12 (NS); G10/G7 (NS); G10/G8 (NS).
Figure 3P (%): the graph illustrates the values of the averages (bars) and standard deviations (lines superimposing the bars). Statistical comparisons are summarized as follows: females: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed in the following groups: G1/G5 (NS); G2/G3 (NS); G2/G4 (NS), G3/G4 (NS). Males: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed between the following groups: G10/G12 (NS); G9/G10 (NS); G9/G12 (NS).
Figure 4Ca/P: the graph illustrates the values of the averages (bars) and standard deviations (lines superimposing the bars). Statistical comparisons are summarized as follows: females: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed in the following groups: G3/G6 (NS). Males: comparison between most of the groups showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). No significant differences (NS) were observed in the following groups: G12/G9 (NS); G12/G11 (NS).