Effects of a Mixed Limosilactobacillus fermentum Formulation with Claimed Probiotic Properties on Cardiometabolic Variables, Biomarkers of Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in Male Rats Fed a High-Fat Diet

Abstract

High-fat diet (HFD) consumption has been linked to dyslipidemia, low-grade inflammation and oxidative stress. This study investigated the effects of a mixed formulation with Limosilactobacillusfermentum 139, L.&nbsp;fermentum 263 and L.&nbsp;fermentum 296 on cardiometabolic parameters, fecal short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) contents and biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress in colon and heart tissues of male rats fed an HFD. Male Wistar rats were grouped into control diet (CTL, n = 6), HFD (n = 6) and HFD with L.&nbsp;fermentum formulation (HFD-Lf, n = 6) groups. The L.fermentum formulation (1 × 10⁹ CFU/mL of each strain) was administered twice a day for 4 weeks. After a 4-week follow-up, biochemical parameters, fecal SCFA, cytokines and oxidative stress variables were evaluated. HFD consumption caused hyperlipidemia, hyperglycemia, low-grade inflammation, reduced fecal acetate and propionate contents and increased biomarkers of oxidative stress in colon and heart tissues when compared to the CTL group. Rats receiving the L. fermentum formulation had reduced hyperlipidemia and hyperglycemia, but similar SCFA contents in comparison with the HFD group (p < 0.05). Rats receiving the L.&nbsp;fermentum formulation had increased antioxidant capacity throughout the colon and heart tissues when compared with the control group. Administration of a mixed L.&nbsp;fermentum formulation prevented hyperlipidemia, inflammation and oxidative stress in colon and heart tissues induced by HFD consumption.

Keywords: Limosilactobacillus fermentum; high-fat diet; inflammation; oxidative stress; probiotic.

Figure 1

Effects of a mixed formulation with L. fermentum 139, L. fermentum 263 and L. fermentum 269 on short-chain fatty acid concentration in fecal samples of rats fed an HFD. Assessment of acetic (A) and propionic acids (B) in fecal samples. Groups: control (CTL, n = 6), high-fat diet (HFD, n = 6) and HFD with L. fermentum formulation (HFD-Lf, n = 6). Data are displayed as mean ± standard deviation, and were analyzed by ANOVA one-way test with Tukey post hoc test. * p < 0.05 indicates significant difference between HFD and CTL groups. During HPLC experiments, acetate contents of 2 rats (01 of CTL group and 01 of HFD-Lf group) were below the analytical detection limit.

Figure 2

Assessment of correlation coefficients between propionic acid concentration, biochemical and cytokine variables. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c); low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) levels; tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α); interleukin 1-beta (IL1β); interleukin 6 (IL-6); interleukin 10 (IL-10).

Figure 3

Effects of a mixed formulation with L. fermentum 139, L. fermentum 263 and L. fermentum 269 on oxidative stress parameters in colon mucosa of rats fed an HFD. Measurement of malondialdehyde levels (MDA, A), superoxide dismutase activity (SOD, B), catalase activity (CAT, C), glutathione S-transferase activity (GST, D) and total sulfhydryl content (E) in colon mucosa. Groups: control (CTL, n = 6), high-fat diet (HFD, n = 6) and HFD with L. fermentum formulation (HFD-Lf, n = 6). Data are displayed as mean ± standard deviation, and were analyzed by ANOVA one-way test with Tukey post hoc test. * p < 0.05 indicates significant difference between HFD or HFD-Lf and CTL groups; # p < 0.05 indicates significant difference between HFD-Lf and HFD groups.

Figure 4

Effects of a mixed formulation with L. fermentum 139, L. fermentum 263 and L. fermentum 269 on oxidative stress parameters in heart tissue of rats fed an HFD. Measurement of levels of malondialdehyde (MDA, A), superoxide dismutase activity (SOD, B), catalase activity (CAT, C), glutathione S-transferase activity (GST, D) and total sulfhydryl content (E) in heart tissue. Groups: control (CTL, n = 6), high-fat diet (HFD, n = 6) and HFD with L. fermentum formulation (HFD-Lf, n = 6). Data are displayed as mean ± standard deviation, and were analyzed by ANOVA one-way test with Tukey post hoc test. * p < 0.05 indicates significant difference between HFD or HFD-Lf and CTL groups; # p < 0.05 indicates significant difference between HFD-Lf and HFD groups.