4.7 Article

Early intervention with breast milk mesenchymal stem cells attenuates the development of diabetic-induced testicular dysfunction via hypothalamic Kisspeptin/Kiss1r-GnRH/GnIH system in male rats

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2019.165577

关键词

Br-MSCs; Diabetes; HPG axis; Kisspeptin system; Steroidogenic pathway; Oxidative stress & apoptosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Diabetic male infertility and sub fertility are major complications that may implicate both central and peripheral pathways as well as mechanisms controlling reproduction. This study was an attempt to explore the potential effect of breast milk mesenchymal stem cells (Br-MSCs) as a therapeutic tool for diabetic induced reproductive dysfunction at molecular level. Forty-five adult male Sprague Dawely rats were divided into 3 groups (n = 15); control group, diabetic group, and Br-MSCs treated diabetic group. The homing ability of Br-MSCs in diabetic treated rat testicles was confirmed via semi-quantitative RT-PCR analysis of a human specific Gapdh mRNA expression level. Our result showed that type 1 diabetic rats exerted an elevation in blood glucose level and a reduction in body weight, fasting serum insulin, FSH, LH, and total testosterone levels, relative and absolute testicular weights, sperm count, motility, and live ratio. In addition, downregulation in the hypothalamic kisspeptin-GnRH system, HPG axis and testicular steroidogenesis compared to control group was noticed. Moreover, upregulation of testicular proinflammatory and apoptotic markers relative mRNA expression compared to control group was observed. Furthermore, a decrease in testicular tissue antioxidant activity (CAT, SOD, GSH) and an increase in lipid peroxidation (MDA) compared to control group was shown. However, Br-MSCs administration restored or even exceeded the normal physiological tone in most of these parameters to the point where a potential therapeutic role for Br-MSCs in typeldiabetic induced infertility can be suggested.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据