Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jun 1;168(1):42-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2009.08.003. Epub 2009 Sep 5.

Diet composition affects surgery-associated weight loss in rats with a compromised alimentary tract

Affiliations

Diet composition affects surgery-associated weight loss in rats with a compromised alimentary tract

Harini S Aiyer et al. J Surg Res. .

Abstract

Background: Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is the fastest growing cancer in terms of incidence and has a high mortality rate. The animal model to study EAC uses esophagoduodenal anastomosis (EDA) to induce mixed-reflux (bile/acid) causing esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and EAC sequence within 6 mo. However, the lack of fully functional stomach in these rats leads to the development of malnutrition.

Methods: We have assessed the ability of a chemically pure, purified ingredient diet (AIN-93M) to reduce surgery-associated malnutrition in rats that have undergone the EDA-surgery. Animals were either sham- (SH) or EDA-operated and fed either a grain-based rodent diet (RD) (SH-RD, n=3; EDA-RD, n=10) or a purified diet (PD) (SH-PD, n=4; EDA-PD, n=11). The animals were weighed periodically for assessment of weight gain and euthanized at the end of 24 wk to measure esophageal tumor incidence.

Results: Animals that underwent sham surgery continued to gain weight throughout the study period and no tumors were detected. The EDA-operated animals had significantly lower weight gain compared with sham animals. There was no significant difference in weight gain among EDA animals fed two different types of diets until 9 wk after the surgery. After 9 wk, EDA-RD continued to lose weight significantly, whereas the weight loss leveled in EDA-PD (P<0.001). At termination, neither tissue histopathology nor tumor incidence was significantly different between the groups.

Conclusion: These results show that compared with a natural ingredient diet, a purified ingredient diet can reduce surgery-associated weight loss in rats with a compromised alimentary tract. This reduction in malnutrition has the potential to reduce the confounding effects of weight loss on future animal studies reported.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: Authors have no potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Effect of diet and EDA-surgery on body weight gain in male SD rats
Rats were fed either RD (solid symbols) or PD (open symbols) and operated with SH-(circles) or EDA- surgery (squares). The surgery was performed on week 0 and weight gain was recorded periodically for 24 weeks. SH-RD (solid circles); EDA-RD (solid squares); SH-PD (open circles) and EDA-PD (open squares). #- Significantly different from SH-operated animals on respective diets (p<0.001) § - Significantly different from EDA-PD (p<0.001)
Figure 2
Figure 2. A–D Histological changes in the esophageal epithelium after esophagoduodenal anastomosis (EDA) in rats fed purified diet
A- Normal esophagus in SH-PD rats; B- esophagitis with hyperplastic epithelium, papillary hypertrophy and inflammatory infiltration; C- Specialized Intestinal Metaplasia (Barrett’s Esophagus) with columnar and goblet cells with islands of squamous cells and D- Esophageal Adenocarcinoma with atypia and invasion of lamina propria in EDA-PD rats (Hematoxylin and eosin staining, 200X magnification). Sequential histological changes occurring in EDA-RD group have been published (14).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Jemal A, Thun MJ, Ries LA, Howe HL, Weir HK, Center MM, Ward E, Wu XC, Eheman C, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2005, featuring trends in lung cancer, tobacco use, and tobacco control. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2008 Dec 3;100:1672–1694. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2008. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2008 Mar–pr;58:71–96. - PubMed
    1. Freedman ND, Abnet CC, Leitzmann MF, Mouw T, Subar AF, Hollenbeck AR, Schatzkin A. A prospective study of tobacco, alcohol, and the risk of esophageal and gastric cancer subtypes. American journal of epidemiology. 2007 Jun 15;165:1424–1433. - PubMed
    1. Trivers KF, Sabatino SA, Stewart SL. Trends in esophageal cancer incidence by histology, United States, 1998–2003. International journal of cancer. 2008 Sep 15;123:1422–1428. - PubMed
    1. Vaughan TL, Davis S, Kristal A, Thomas DB. Obesity, alcohol, and tobacco as risk factors for cancers of the esophagus and gastric cardia: adenocarcinoma versus squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1995 Mar;4:85–92. - PubMed

Publication types