3种2型糖尿病大鼠血糖波动造模的方法比较

Comparison of the Three Models on Blood Glucose Fluctuation of Diabetic Rats

目的利用3种方法建立糖尿病大鼠血糖波动模型并进行比较.方法 75只SD大鼠随机分成正常组(n=15)和模型组(n=60),高糖高脂饲料喂养模型组SD大鼠6周后用小剂量链脲佐菌素(STZ)30 mg/kg腹腔注射诱导建立糖尿病模型,造模成功后将其随机分成持续高糖组(n=15)、波动A组(n=15)、波动B组(n=15)和波动C组(n=15).波动A组大鼠每日2次腹腔注射50%葡萄糖,波动B组每日2次皮下注射普通胰岛素,波动C组每日2次腹腔注射50%葡萄糖+每日2次皮下注射普通胰岛素,建立糖尿病大鼠血糖波动模型.观察大鼠"三多一少"症状,血糖变化情况.结果 (1)血糖波动组和持续高糖组的"三多一少"症状明显;(2)实验结束时,持续高糖组存活13只,存活率86.7%,波动A组存活10只,存活率66.7%,波动B组存活11只,存活率73.3%,波动C组存活8只,存活率53.3%.血糖波动C组与正常组和持续高糖组相比,存活率明显下降(P分别为0.003,0.046),但与波动A组和波动B组相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);(3)血糖波动A组、血糖波动B组、血糖波动C组的SDBG、LAGE均高于持续高糖组[SDBG:波动A组(3.51±0.59)mmol/L、波动B组(3.97±0.59)mmol/L、波动C组(6.43±0.45)mmol/L vs(1.84±0.55)mmol/L;LAGE:A组(8.92±1.22)mmol/L、波动B组(10.45±1.88)mmol/L、波动C组(16.92±1.16)mmol/L vs(5.10±1.50)mmol/L];(4)与其他两组血糖波动组相比,血糖波动C组SDBG、LAGE明显升高[SDBG:(6.43±0.45)mmol/L vs(3.51±0.59)mmol/L vs(3.97±0.59)mmol/L;LAGE:(16.92±1.16)mmol/L vs(8.92±1.22)mmol/L vs(10.45±1.88)mmol/L].结论 3种方法均能成功建立糖尿病大鼠血糖波动模型,腹腔注射葡萄糖结合皮下注射胰岛素的方法造成的血糖波动更大,且存活率无明显降低.

Objective To compare three modeling methods in Blood Glucose Fluctuation of Diabetic Rats.Methods The 75 male Sprague-Dawley（SD ） rats were randomly assigned into two groups,normal group （n=15） and model group （n=60） .Normal group rats were fed with normal diet,model group rats were fed withahigh-sucrose-high-fat diet.After 6 weeks,a low dose of streptozotocin （STZ,30 mg/kg ） was injected to inducehyperglycemia in model group rats.And then the model group rats were randomly divided into four subgroups：diabetic group （n=15 ）, groupA （n=15）, groupB （n=15） and groupC （n=15） . Group A rats wereinduced by intraperitoneal injecting 50% glucose by 0.38g/kg twice daily at 8 o＇clock and 14 o＇clock.GroupB ratswere induced by subcutaneous injecting insulin at 8：30 and 14：30. GroupC were induced by intraperitoneal injecting 50% glucose by 0.38g/kg at 8 o＇clock and 14 o＇clock and subcutaneous injecting insulin at 8：30 and 14：30. Diabeticgroup were induced by intraperitoneal injecting 0.9% saline.All rats were executed after intervening for 6 weeks. Foodintake, weight, urine and blood glucose were observed during the experiment. Results （1） More drinking,more eating,more urine and low weight were observed in diabetic group,groupA,group B and group C. （2） Atthe end of the experiment,15 rats were alive in the normal group, the survival rate was 100%.13 rats were alive inthe diabetic group,the survival rate was 86.7%. 10 rats were alive in groupA, the survival rate was 66.7%. 11 ratswere alive in groupB,the survival rate was 73.3%.8 rats were alive in groupC, the survival rate was 53.3%. Thedifference between the five groups was statistically significant （ P= 0.03） . The survival rate of groupC wassignificantly lower than that of normal group and diabetic group （ P= 0.003,P = 0.046, respectively ）, but therewas no significant difference compared with group A and groupB （ P〉0.05） . （3） Compared with the diabeticgroup,SDBG and LAGE were significantly increased in groupA,groupB and groupC [ SDBG：groupA （3.51±0.59） mmol/L,groupB（3.97±0.59） mmol/L,groupC （6.43±0.45） ]mmol/L vs （1.84±0.55） mmol/L;LAGE：groupA（8.92±1.22） mmol/L,groupB（10.45±1.88） mmol/L,groupC（16.92±1.16） mmol/L vs（5.10±1.50） mmol/L]. （ 4） Compared with group A and groupB, SDBG and LAGE were significantly increasedin group C [SDBG： （ 6.43±0.45）mmol/L vs （3.51±0.59） mmol/L vs（3.97±0.59） mmol/L;LAGE： （ 16.92±1.16） mmol/L vs （8.92±1.22）mmol/L vs （10.45±1.88） mmol/L]. Conclusions The blood glucose fluctuationdiabetic rats model was successfully induced by three methods. The method of intraperitoneal injection of glucosecombined with subcutaneous injection of insulin can cause great fluctuation but the survival rate may not be reduced.