论文部分内容阅读
目的探讨植物蛋白和动物蛋白干预对气阴两虚2型糖尿病大鼠糖、脂代谢、肝和肾脏功能的影响。方法将110只雄性SD大鼠随机分为正常对照组(10只)、DM模型组(20只)、病症结合组(80只)。正常对照组大鼠给予普通饲料,其余组给予高糖高脂饲料。DM模型组大鼠腹腔注射链脲菌素(STZ)(40 mg/kg体质量),病症结合组大鼠附子、青皮(15.75g/kg体质量)灌胃每日1次+腹腔注射STZ(40 mg/kg体质量)后,按照血糖水平分为气阴两虚DM组(附子、青皮,15.75g/kg体质量)、大豆蛋白组(大豆蛋白,0.5g/kg体质量)、牛奶蛋白组(牛奶蛋白,0.5g/kg体质量)、黄连素组(黄连素,0.1g/kg体质量),连续灌胃给药4w。蛋白干预4w后,检测并分析糖、脂代谢、肝和肾脏功能等指标。结果 (1)第1~4周,DM模型组、气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组体质量比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(2)干预前至第4周,DM模型组和气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组血糖比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(3)气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组HDL比较差异均有统计学意义。(4)气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组比较,总蛋白(TP)、白蛋白(ALB)明显降低,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),大豆蛋白组与气阴两虚DM组比较,TP、GLB均明显升高,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);(5)气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组比较,尿素(Urea)、肌酐(Crea)、尿素氮/肌酐(BUN/CREA)、尿蛋白(Pro)值差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),大豆蛋白组与气阴两虚DM组比较,Crea、BUN/CREA、Pro差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),牛奶蛋白组与气阴两虚DM组比较,BUN/CREA差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(6)气阴两虚DM组与正常对照组比较,糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、血清胰岛素(Insulin)差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论蛋白干预对气阴两虚型2型糖尿病SD大鼠肝、肾功能产生了一定保护作用。
Objective To investigate the effects of plant protein and animal protein on glucose, lipid metabolism, liver and kidney function in type 2 diabetes rats with qi and yin deficiency. Methods 110 male SD rats were randomly divided into normal control group (n = 10), DM model group (n = 20) and disease combination group (n = 80). Normal control rats were given normal feed, the rest were given high-sugar and high-fat feed. Rats in DM model group were intraperitoneally injected with streptozotocin (STZ) (40 mg / kg body weight), and aconite and cuticle (15.75 g / kg body weight) 40 mg / kg body weight) were divided into two groups according to their blood glucose levels: DM group (Aconitum, Peel, 15.75g / kg body weight), Soybean protein group (Soybean protein, 0.5g / kg body weight) Group (milk protein, 0.5g / kg body weight), berberine group (berberine, 0.1g / kg body weight), continuous oral administration of 4w. Protein intervention 4w, detection and analysis of sugar, lipid metabolism, liver and kidney function and other indicators. Results (1) From the first week to the fourth week, there was significant difference in body weight between DM group and DM group and normal control group (P <0.05). (2) There were significant differences in the blood glucose between the DM model group and the DM group and the normal control group before and 4 weeks after intervention (P <0.05). (3) There was significant difference in HDL between DM group and normal control group. (4) Compared with normal control group, total protein (TP) and albumin (ALB) in DM group were significantly lower than that in normal control group (P <0.05) (P <0.05). (5) Compared with the normal control group, the levels of Urea, Crea, urea nitrogen in DM group were significantly higher than those in normal control group / Creatinine (BUN / CREA) and urine protein (Pro) were significantly different (P <0.05). There were significant differences in Crea, BUN / CREA and Pro between soy protein group and DM group (P <0.05). The difference of BUN / CREA between milk protein group and DM group was statistically significant (P <0.05). (6) Compared with normal control group, the difference of HbA1c and Insulin between DM group and DM group was statistically significant (P <0.05). Conclusions Protein intervention may play a protective role on the liver and kidney function in type 2 diabetic rats with deficiency of qi and yin.