Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (13)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chakkalakal, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Donohue, T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chakkalakal, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Donohue, T. M., Jr
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Alcohol and Alcoholism Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 13-20, 2002
© 2002 Medical Council on Alcohol

CHRONIC ETHANOL CONSUMPTION RESULTS IN DEFICIENT BONE REPAIR IN RATS

Dennis A. Chakkalakal1,2,3,*, Jerzy R. Novak1,3, Edward D. Fritz1,2, Teresa J. Mollner1,2, Daniel L. McVicker1, Denise L. Lybarger1, Michael H. McGuire2 and Terrence M. Donohue, Jr1,3

1 Omaha Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68105,
2 Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha, NE 68178 and
3 University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198, USA

Received 22 February 2001; first review notified 30 May 2001; accepted 2 July 2001

— There is evidence that ethanol inhibits osteoblast function and that chronic ethanol consumption induces systemic bone loss and increases the risk of fracture in humans. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether chronic ethanol consumption also compromises the healing of injured bone. Male Sprague–Dawley rats, 8–10 weeks old, were placed into four feeding groups: group A received ethanol (36% of calories) as part of a liquid diet; group B was pair-fed to group A and received an isocaloric control diet containing maltodextrin; group C was fed the AIN-93M standard semi-purified liquid diet ad libitum; group D was fed the same ethanol diet as group A before bone injury, but after surgery (see below) these rats were given isocaloric control diet ad libitum. After 6 weeks on their respective diets, a bone repair model was surgically created at the midshaft in both fibulae of each rat. Seven weeks after injury the animals were euthanized and bone healing was evaluated by determining rigidity of the fibula by three-point bending, flexural modulus of the repair tissue and mineral content of the repair tissue. Rigidity of fibula in ethanol-fed rats and their pair-fed controls (groups A and B) were respectively 48 and 47% lower than in group C. Flexural modulus of the repair tissue in ethanol-fed rats had a 55% (P = 0.046) deficiency compared with their pair-fed controls. The mineral contents in groups A and B were respectively 16 and 13% lower than in group C. There were no significant differences in the results between groups C and D. Thus, the outcome of bone repair in ethanol-fed rats was deficient compared with rats receiving a standard maintenance diet. The repair tissue in ethanol-fed rats was mechanically inferior to that in pair-fed controls. This deficiency could not be attributed to the reduced food consumption of these animals. On the other hand, the restoration of normal bone healing in group D cannot be attributed solely to the cessation of ethanol feeding after bone injury because of the increased food consumption during this period.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Toxicol SciHome page
D. S. Perrien, E. C. Wahl, W. R. Hogue, U. Feige, J. Aronson, M. J. J. Ronis, T. M. Badger, and C. K. Lumpkin Jr.
IL-1 and TNF Antagonists Prevent Inhibition of Fracture Healing by Ethanol in Rats
Toxicol. Sci., December 1, 2004; 82(2): 656 - 660.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.