| Literature DB >> 33808251 |
Jonas Laget1,2, Youzan Ferdinand Djohan3, Laura Jeanson2, Karen Muyor1, Eric Badia3, Jean Paul Cristol3, Charles Coudray4, Christine Feillet-Coudray4, Claire Vigor5, Camille Oger5, Jean-Marie Galano5, Thierry Durand5, Anne-Dominique Lajoix2, Nathalie Gayrard1, Bernard Jover3.
Abstract
Excessive fat consumption leads to the development of ectopic adipose tissues, affecting the organs they surround. Peripancreatic adipose tissue is implicated in glucose homeostasis regulation and can be impaired in obesity. High palm oil consumption's effects on health are still debated. We hypothesised that crude and refined palm oil high-fat feeding may have contrasting effects on peripancreatic adipocyte hypertrophy, inflammation and lipid oxidation compound production in obese rats. In Wistar rats, morphological changes, inflammation and isoprostanoid production following oxidative stress were assessed in peripancreatic adipose tissue after 12 weeks of diets enriched in crude or refined palm oil or lard (56% energy from fat in each case) versus a standard chow diet (11% energy from fat). Epididymal white and periaortic brown adipose tissues were also included in the study. A refined palm oil diet disturbed glucose homeostasis and promoted lipid deposition in periaortic locations, as well as adipocyte hypertrophy, macrophage infiltration and isoprostanoid (5-F2c-isoprostane and 7(RS)-ST-Δ8-11-dihomo-isofuran) production in peripancreatic adipose tissue. Crude palm oil induced a lower impact on adipose deposits than its refined form and lard. Our results show that the antioxidant composition of crude palm oil may have a protective effect on ectopic adipose tissues under the condition of excessive fat intake.Entities:
Keywords: adipose tissue; high fat intake; inflammation; lipid oxidation; palm oil
Year: 2021 PMID: 33808251 PMCID: PMC8065769 DOI: 10.3390/nu13041134
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Body weight, glucose homeostasis and blood lipids.
| Control | Crude PO | Refined PO | Lard | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial body weight (g) | 209 ± 4 | 203 ± 1 | 204 ± 2 | 208 ± 3 | NS |
| Final body weight (g) | 527 ± 11 | 609 ± 14 ** | 612 ± 20 ** | 611 ± 23 ** | 0.0065 |
| Body weight gain (g) | 318 ± 9 | 406 ± 14 ** | 408 ± 19 ** | 403 ± 22 ** | 0.0022 |
| eWAT weight (g) | 12.6 ± 1.8 | 20.1 ± 2.1 | 16.6 ± 3.5 | 21.4 ± 2.9 | NS |
| Fasting glucose (mg/dL) | 136.0 ± 3.5 | 155.0 ± 5.8 * | 157.1 ± 3.7 ** | 131.6 ± 5.7 | 0.0015 |
| Fasting insulin (mU/L) | 53.5 ± 7.6 | 108.6 ± 22.9 | 147.0 ± 29.9 | 93.6 ± 23.6 | NS |
| HOMA-IR | 18.1 ± 2.8 | 41.7 ± 9.1 | 57.6 ± 12.0 ** | 31.6 ± 8.7 | 0.0344 |
| Blood TG (mM) | 1.03 ± 0.15 | 0.99 ± 0.11 | 1.33 ± 0.21 | 1.01 ± 0.15 | NS |
| Total cholesterol (mM) | 1.97 ± 0.16 | 1.75 ± 0.15 | 2.00 ± 0.14 | 1.55 ± 0.09 | NS |
| HDL cholesterol (mM) | 1.48 ± 0.12 | 1.34 ± 0.85 | 1.56 ± 0.12 | 1.06 ± 0.12 * | 0.0179 |
Results are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 7 animals per group. After one-way ANOVA (p-value indicated), data were compared by a Fishers’ protected least significant difference (PLSD) test: * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 vs. control group; PO: palm oil, NS: non-significant, eWAT: epididymal white adipose tissue, HOMA-IR: homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, TG: triglycerides, HDL: high-density lipoprotein.
Figure 1Adipocyte size and macrophage infiltration in epididymal white adipose tissue (eWAT). (A) Representative microphotographs of haematoxylin staining (×200; scale bar = 20 µm); (B) quantitative analysis of adipocyte area (µm2); (C) relative frequency of adipocyte area (%); (D) quantitative analysis of immunohistochemistry for CD68 (number of positive cells/mm2 of adipose tissue). Data are shown as means ± SEM, n = 4–7 animals per group. * p < 0.05 vs. control diet.
Figure 2Adipocyte size and macrophage infiltration in peripancreatic adipose tissue (pWAT). (A) Representative microphotographs of haematoxylin staining (×200; scale bar = 20µm); (B) quantitative analysis of adipocyte area (µm2); (C) relative frequency of adipocyte area (%); (D) quantitative analysis of immunohistochemistry for CD68 (number of positive cells/mm2 of adipose tissue). Inset presents an example of CD68 staining in refined PO. Data are shown as means ± SEM, n = 4–7 animals per group. * p < 0.05 vs. control diet.
Figure 3Lipid inclusions in periaortic brown adipose tissue (AoBAT). (A) Representative microphotographs of haematoxylin staining (×200; scale bar = 20 µm); (B) quantitative analysis of lipid inclusions as % of total tissue area; (C) box plot displaying the distribution of lipid inclusions. Quantification of lipid inclusion was realised in 10–30 fields per rat. Data are shown as means ± SEM, n = 7 animals per group. * p < 0.05 vs. control diet.
Figure 4Impact of high intake of palm oils and lard on isoprostanoid concentration in peripancreatic adipose tissue (pWAT). (A) Quantification of isoprostanoids with a trans configuration: 15(RS)-15-F2t-IsoP and 5(RS)-5-F2t-IsoP (fg/adipocyte). (B) Quantification of 5(RS)-5-F2c-IsoP, an isoprostanoid with a cis configuration (fg/adipocyte). (C) Quantification of the isofuran 7(RS)-ST- Δ8-11-dihomo-IsoF (fg/adipocyte). Isoprostanoids were assayed from 200 mg of adipose tissue per rat. Data are shown as means ± SEM, n = 6–7 animals per group. * p < 0.05 or ** p < 0.01 vs. control diet.