| Literature DB >> 27588174 |
Shuiping Yu1, Xueling Zhou1, Bingzong Hou2, Bo Tang1, Jian Li2, Baimeng Zhang2.
Abstract
The present study aimed to evaluate the protective effect of rosuvastatin treatment on the mechanism of oxidized low-density lipoprotein (Ox-LDL) in rats with liver fibrosis. In total, 72 male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 3 groups: 24 in the control group (A), 24 in the obstructive jaundice models group (B) and 24 in the rosuvastatin group (C). Each group was further divided into four subgroups for assessment at different time-points. The obstructive jaundice models were established and rosuvastatin was administered by gavage. Liver fibrosis indicators, Ox-LDL, malonaldehyde (MDA) and superoxide dismutase (SOD), were measured and liver pathological changes were observed at weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4 after model induction. In groups B and C, the rat models were successfully established, and there were significant changes in the expression of Ox-LDL and the three liver fibrosis indicators when compared to group A (P<0.01). However, the expression of Ox-LDL and the three liver fibrosis indicators in group C were decreased compared with group B (P<0.05), while SOD increased (P<0.05) and MDA decreased (P<0.05). The three liver fibrosis indicators were different in comparison to group B (P<0.05). Thus, there appeared to be an association between the expression of Ox-LDL and liver fibrosis. Treatment with rosuvastatin could regulate the expression of Ox-LDL and improve liver fibrosis in rat models with obstructive jaundice.Entities:
Keywords: liver fibrosis; obstructive jaundice model; oxidized low-density lipoprotein; rosuvastatin
Year: 2016 PMID: 27588174 PMCID: PMC4998105 DOI: 10.3892/br.2016.722
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Rep ISSN: 2049-9434
Liver fibrosis indicators of the rats in the control and model groups to confirm the establishment of the model.
| Group | Hyaluronic acid, ng/ml | Laminin, ng/ml | Procollagen III, ng/ml |
|---|---|---|---|
| Week 1 | |||
| A | 46.50±24.26 | 63.05±36.25 | 29.40±12.36 |
| B | 62.67±33.68 | 52.56±25.20 | 23.93±17.45 |
| Week 2 | |||
| A | 38.65±13.24 | 51.86±31.35 | 12.56±12.20 |
| B | 58.33±19.05 | 39.35±25.32 | 18.20±9.46 |
| Week 3 | |||
| A | 35.60±23.36[ | 59.35±21.65[ | 25.32±13.26 |
| B | 90.64±43.16 | 88.65±35.86 | 53.35±26.15 |
| Week 4 | |||
| A | 48.06±15.25[ | 31.65±13.42[ | 30.63±22.47[ |
| B | 365.35±132.35 | 80.46±64.34 | 62.91±17.56 |
P<0.01 or
P<0.05 vs. group B. A, control group; B, model group. Values are mean ± standard deviation, n=6.
Figure 1.(A) Representative micrographs of the normal appearances of hepatocytes in group A. (B) Necrosis and the emergence of proliferation of hepatocytes in were observed group C. (C) Fibrous septamorphological abnormalities of hepatocytes in group B were evident (all magnification, ×200).
Figure 2.Expression of (A-C) SOD and (D-F) MDA in the different groups (magnification, ×200). SOD staining was stronger in (C) group A compared to groups (A) B and (B) C. Group B had weaker expression of SOD compared to group C. MDA staining was stronger in (F) group B, whereas this was weaker in (D) group A. The staining intensity was graded as (A and D) 0, (B and E) 1, and (C and F) 2. SOD, superoxide dismutase; MDA, malonaldehyde.
SOD and MDA levels of rats from groups A and B.
| Group | SOD | MDA | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Week 1 | |||
| A | 5.28±1.56 | 0.82±0.38 | |
| B | 4.36±2.69 | 0.94±0.65 | |
| C | 5.22±2.36 | 0.86±0.46 | |
| Week 2 | |||
| A | 4.86±2.58 | 0.78±0.36 | |
| B | 4.65±1.96 | 1.54±0.63 | |
| C | 4.95±1.38 | 1.65±0.35 | |
| Week 3 | |||
| A | 5.66±2.65[ | 0.80±0.32[ | |
| B | 3.86±1.56 | 2.98±0.66 | |
| C | 4.62±1.88[ | 2.18±0.62[ | |
| Week 4 | |||
| A | 5.45±2.38[ | 0.98±0.46[ | |
| B | 3.26±1.68 | 4.66±2.16 | |
| C | 3.94±2.66[ | 3.82±1.36[ |
P<0.01 or
P<0.05 vs. group B. SOD, superoxide dismutase; MDA, malonaldehyde; A, control group; B, model group; C, rosuvastatin group. Values are mean ± standard deviation, n=6.
Figure 3.Expression of Ox-LDL in the different groups (magnification, ×400). Ox-LDL staining was weaker in (A) group A compared to groups (B) C and (C) B. Group B had stronger expression of Ox-LDL compared to group C. The staining score of A was graded as 1, B was 3, and C was 5. Ox-LDL, oxidized low-density lipoprotein.
Oxidized low-density lipoprotein expression level of the rats from the different groups.
| Group | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 1.17±0.75 | 1.17±0.41 | 1.17±0.75[ | 1.17±0.41[ |
| B | 1.00±0.63 | 1.33±0.52 | 3.33±1.03 | 4.40±0.70 |
| C | 0.83±0.41 | 1.17±0.75 | 2.00±0.63[ | 2.33±1.21[ |
P<0.01
P<0.05 vs. group B. A, control group; B, model group; C, rosuvastatin group. Values are mean ± standard deviation, n=24.
Liver fibrosis indicators of the rats in the model and following rosuvastatin treatment.
| Group | Hyaluronic acid, ng/ml | Laminin, ng/ml | Procollagen III, ng/ml |
|---|---|---|---|
| Week 1 | |||
| B | 62.67±33.68 | 52.56±25.20 | 23.93±17.45 |
| C | 52.67±35.66 | 42.36±28.15 | 22.39±15.58 |
| Week 2 | |||
| B | 58.33±19.05 | 39.35±25.32 | 18.20±9.46 |
| C | 48.36±15.28 | 32.65±21.28 | 16.15±8.50 |
| Week 3 | |||
| B | 90.64±43.16 | 88.65±35.86 | 53.35±26.15 |
| C | 70.18±33.24[ | 68.36±31.52[ | 43.35±18.64[ |
| Week 4 | |||
| B | 365.35±132.35 | 80.46±64.34 | 62.91±17.56 |
| C | 258.25±128.66[ | 65.24±36.35[ | 45.17±21.36[ |
P<0.05
P<0.01 vs. group B. B, model group; C, rosuvastatin group. Values are mean ± standard deviation, n=6.