| Literature DB >> 30915409 |
Hanaa Mohamed Khalaf1, Mohamed Abdellah Ibrahim1, Entesar Farghaly Amin1, Salwa Abdel-Tawab Ibrahim1, Soha Abdel-Wahab2, Yasser Mahrous Fouad3.
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY: Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a challenging health problem. Hyperuricemia is a key player in the pathogenesis of NAFLD. This study investigated the effect of allopurinol (uric acid synthesis inhibitor) in combination with metformin and vitamin E in prevention of fructose induced-fatty liver in rats.Entities:
Keywords: NAFLD; allopurinol; metformin; vitamin E
Year: 2019 PMID: 30915409 PMCID: PMC6431087 DOI: 10.5114/ceh.2019.83159
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Exp Hepatol ISSN: 2392-1099
Effect of allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E and their combination on liver index, and serum levels of liver enzymes, triglycerides, and uric acid
| Group | Liver index Liver weight (mg)/body weight (g) | Serum TG (mg/dl) | ALT (U/l) | AST (U/l) | Uric acid (mg/dl) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 2.28 ±0.19 | 91.50 ±5.98 | 25.02 ±2.87 | 21.20 ±3.78 | 3.00 ±0.36 |
| Fructose (F) | 4.86 ±0.34 | 166.70 ±8.82 | 68.28 ±3.26 | 60.60 ±3.21 | 7.41 ±0.40 |
| F/Allopurinol (A) | 3.74 ±0.11[ | 110.32 ±7.13[ | 37.67 ±2.14[ | 40.60 ±2.50 | 3.33 ±0.35[ |
| F/Metformin (M) | 3.56 ±0.29[ | 109.70 ±3.73[ | 43.10 ±3.94 | 41.40 ±3.20 | 5.50 ±0.45 |
| F/Vitamin E (E) | 3.94 ±0.19[ | 94.00 ±7.07[ | 43.92 ±3.97 | 39.41 ±5.90 | 4.72 ±0.25 |
| F/M + E | 3.02 ±1.02[ | 94.67 ±6.76[ | 34.67 ±1.23[ | 30.60 ±1.66[ | 5.25 ±0.30 |
| F/A + M + E | 3.66 ±0.21[ | 79.17 ±7.08[ | 25.47 ±3.63[ | 22.61 ±1.25[ | 3.50 ±0.42[ |
Data represent the mean ± SEM (n = 6). Results were considered significant when p < 0.05.
Significant difference from control group.
Significant difference from fructose group.
Significant difference from allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E, and metformin + vitamin E groups, TG – triglycerides, ALT – alanine aminotransferase, AST – aspartate aminotransferase
Effects of allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E and their combination on oxidative stress parameters and triglycerides in hepatic tissue
| Group | GSH (mg/g tissue) | SOD (U/g tissue) | MDA (nmol/g tissue) | TG (mg/g tissue) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 129.7 ±1.14 | 1539 ±32.62 | 81.24 ±5.61 | 89.77 ±7.85 |
| Fructose (F) | 107 ±1.70 | 1224 ±69.01 | 128.73 ±2.53 | 213.70 ±10.33 |
| F/Allopurinol (A) | 119.3 ±2.77 | 1481 ±19.18[ | 101 ±1.46 | 90.80 ±3.31[ |
| F/Metformin (M) | 128.9 ±1.44[ | 1548 ±38.68[ | 98.23 ±2.83 | 105.90 ±4.34[ |
| F/Vitamin E (E) | 122.9 ±1.76[ | 1502 ±42.13[ | 101.44 ±3.87 | 92.20 ±3.48[ |
| F/M + E | 122.5 ±1.67[ | 1502 ±31.66[ | 92.83 ±2.24[ | 101.8 ±3.07[ |
| F/A + M + E | 129.8 ±1.30[ | 1530 ±41.14[ | 91.26 ±1.76[ | 97.09 ±4.04[ |
Data represent the mean ± SEM (n = 6). Results were considered significant when p < 0.05.
Significant difference from control group.
Significant difference from fructose group.
Significant difference from allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E, and metformin + vitamin E groups. GSH – glutathione, SOD – superoxide dismutase, MDA – malondialdehyde, TG – triglycerides.
Fig. 1Effects of allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E and their combination with allopurinol on hepatic TNF-α level. Data represent the mean ± SEM (n = 6)#, *Significant difference from control group and fructose group, respectively (p < 0.05)
Fig. 2Photomicrograph of the liver tissue: A) control group with normal liver histology, B) fructose group showing ballooning of hepatocytes with vacuolated cytoplasm and darkly stained nuclei (curved arrow), microvesicular steatosis (straight arrow), and inflammatory cell infiltration (star). C-E) Allopurinol, metformin and vitamin E treated groups, respectively showing mild (D,E) to moderate (F) improvement in liver histology, F) metformin plus vitamin E treated group showing moderate improvement in liver histology and G) combination group (allopurinol plus metformin plus vitamin E) showing significant improvement liver histology (most of the hepatocytes are back to normal (arrowhead). Note absence of inflammatory cell infiltration (H&E, scale bar 20 μm)
Effect of allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E and their combination on histopathological score of hepatic tissue
| Group | Steatosis | Inflammation |
|---|---|---|
| Control | 0.00 ±0.00 | 0.00 ±0.00 |
| Fructose (F) | 3.0 ±0.00 | 1.66 ±0.33 |
| F/Allopurinol (A) | 1.45 ±0.01 | 1.45 ±0.01 |
| F/Metformin (M) | 1.66 ±0.32 | 1.00 ±0.00 |
| F/Vitamin E (E) | 2.33 ±0.31 | 0.66 ±0.33 |
| F/M + E | 1.67 ±0.12 | 1.012 ±0.04 |
| F/A + M + E | 0.66 ±0.30[ | 0.33 ±0.33[ |
Data represent the mean ± SEM (n = 6). Results were considered significant when p < 0.05.
Significant difference from control group.
Significant difference from fructose group.
Significant difference from allopurinol, metformin, vitamin E, and metformin + vitamin E groups.
Fig. 3iNOS immunostaining: A) negative expression of iNOS in liver tissue of (B) positive iNOS immunostaining in numerous cells (arrow) of liver tissue of fructose treated group. Note that the expression is mainly in nonparenchymal cells. C-E) panels show a decrease in the number of immunopositive cells in allopurinol, metformin and vitamin E treated groups, respectively. Note: low intensity of immunostaining. F) shows very few positive cells in metformin plus vitamin E treated group. G) Panel shows nearly negative expression of (INOS) in liver tissue of combination group (allopurinol plus metformin plus vitamin E); hematoxylin counterstain, scale bar 20 μm. H represents the score of iNOS expression (number of positive stained cells) in hepatic tissue. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. #,*,$significant compared to normal control, fructose non-treated, and either monotherapy or double therapy treated groups, respectively