Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-skzmx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T00:31:26.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Intrauterine exposure to a high-fat diet, with different levels of lipids, and its gastrointestinal repercussions: a model of fetal programming in rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2024

Jéssica Fortunato-Silva
Affiliation:
Program in Applied Structural and Cellular Biology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
Lívia Prometti de Rezende
Affiliation:
Program in Applied Structural and Cellular Biology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
Marcos Luiz Ferreira-Neto
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
Luiz Borges Bispo-da-Silva
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
Ana Paula Coelho Balbi*
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: Ana Paula Coelho Balbi; Email: paulabalb@yahoo.com.br
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is known that adverse stimuli, such as altered diets during pregnancy and lactation, can result in deleterious effects on the progeny. The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible gastrointestinal repercussions in the offspring of Wistar rats exposed to high-fat diets. Pregnant rats were divided into three groups: normolipidic diet (3.5% lipids), a diet containing 28% lipids, and a diet with 40% lipids. Body weight and food, water, daily caloric, and macronutrient intake were evaluated in the pregnant rats. Structural and functional gastrointestinal parameters were assessed in 30-day-old male pups. Depending on the lipid content of the maternal diet, the pups may exhibit gastric mucosal thickening, an increase in the relative weight of the small intestine, a reduction in the jejunal and ileal mucosa, and a decrease in the total thickness of the ileum. Additionally, there may be a reduction in the number of villi per area in these organs and a thinning of the muscular layer in the large intestine. The structural changes induced by the maternal high-fat diet seem to reduce the stomach’s sensitivity to ethanol-induced ulcers, which is the only functional alteration observed. Therefore, the offspring of dams exposed to high-fat diets during pregnancy and lactation exhibits impaired gastrointestinal development, with alterations depending on dietary fat content and specific gastrointestinal regions. Structural changes did not always result in functional abnormalities and, in some cases, appeared protective. The long-term consequences of the observed morphological alterations require further investigation.

Information

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with The International Society for Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD)
Figure 0

Figure 1. Classification in scores for gastric lesions.42

Figure 1

Figure 2. Representation of intestinal portions referring to fragments collected for structural analysis: (1) duodenum, (2) jejunum, (3) ileum, (4) cecum, (5) colon, (6) rectum.46

Figure 2

Figure 3. Schematic representation of the measurement of the layers’ thickness from the small intestine wall. Hematoxylin and eosin staining. 4× increase. (1) Total thickness, (2) muscular layer thickness, (3) submucosa layer thickness, (4) mucosa layer thickness.

Figure 3

Table 1. Maternal data: food, liquid, daily caloric, carbohydrates, proteins and lipids intake, weight gain, and number of pups from control (C: normal fat diet – 3.5%), Experimental 1 (E1: high-fat diet – 28%), and Experimental 2 (E2: high-fat diet – 40%) groups

Figure 4

Figure 4. Offspring body weight and stomach structural and functional data from control (C: normal fat diet – 3.5%), Experimental 1 (E1: high-fat diet – 28%), and Experimental 2 (E2: high-fat diet – 40%) groups. Values are expressed as median with percentiles 25 and 75 for offspring body weight, stomach areas, and ulcer index (Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post-test) or mean: SEM for stomach relative weight, stomach total thickness, gastric submucosa thickness, and gastric muscle thickness (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-test). The level of significance was set at p < 0.05 ***C: p < 0.001 versus control; *C: p < 0.05 versus control, ***E1: p < 0.001 versus Experimental 1; *E1: p < 0.05 versus Experimental 1. SW/BW = stomach weight/body weight.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Small intestine length and relative weight and duodenal, jejunal, ileal area and villi/area from control (C: normal fat diet – 3.5%), Experimental 1 (E1: high-fat diet – 28%), and Experimental 2 (E2: high-fat diet – 40%) groups. Values are expressed as median with percentiles 25 and 75 for duodenal mucosa area and villi area (Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post-test) or mean=SEM for small intestine length and relative weight, jejunal and ileal mucosa area, jejunal and ileal villi area (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-test). The level of significance was set at p < 0.05 **C: p < 0.01 versus control; *C: p < 0.05 versus control, **E1: p < 0.01 versus Experimental 1. IW/BW = intestine weight/body weight.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Morphometric data total, mucosal, submucosal, and muscle thickness of duodenum, jejunum, and ileum of small intestine from control (C; normal fat diet 3.5%), Experimental 1 (E1: high fat diet – 28%), and Experimental 2 (E2: high-fat diet – 40%) groups. Values are expressed as median with percentiles 25 and 75 for jejunal total thickness and ileal muscle thickness (Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post-test) or mean=SEM for duodenal total, mucosal, submucosal, and muscle thickness, jejunal mucosal, submucosal, and muscle thickness, and ileal total, mucosal, and submucosal thickness (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-test). The level of significance was set at p < 0.05 *C: p < 0.05 versus control; *E1: p < 0.05 versus Experimental 1.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Duodenal, jejunal, and ileal villi length/area, enteropooling and small intestinal motility from control (C: normal fat diet – 3.5%). Experimental 1 (E1: high-fat diet – 28%) and Experimental 2 (E2 high-fat diet – 40%) groups. Values are expressed as median with percentiles 25 and 75 for small intestine motility (Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post-test) or mean=SEM for duodenal, jejunal, ileal villi length/area and enteropooling (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-test). The level of significance was set at p < 0.05 ***C: p < 0.001 versus saline of the same group, *C: p < 0.05 versus control.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Morphometric data: total, mucosal, submucosal, and muscle thickness of cecum, colon, and rectum of large intestine from control (C normal fat diet – 3.5%), Experimental 1 (E1: high-fat diet – 28%), and Experimental 2 (E2: high-fat diet – 40%) groups. Values are expressed as median with percentiles 25 and 75 for cecum mucosal and submucosal thickness and distal colonic transit (Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post-test) or mean=SEM for cecum total and muscle thickness, colon total, mucosal, submucosal and muscle thickness, rectum total, mucosal, submucosal, and muscle thickness (one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-test). The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. *C: p < 0.05 versus control, ***E:1 p < 0.001 versus Experimental 1; *E1: p < 0.05 versus Experimental 1.