Preclinical trial shows avocado improves vascular injury in L-NAME-treated rats, suggesting potential therapeutic benefits.
Background Endothelial dysfunction, dyslipidemia, and myocardial injury are major contributors to cardiovascular disease. Avocado (Persea americana), rich in monounsaturated fatty acids and phytochemicals, has shown lipid-lowering and anti-inflammatory properties, but its integrated effects on vascular injury remain unclear. Methods Male rats were randomized into six groups (n = 4 per group): control, avocado, L-NAME, L-NAME+drugs (metoprolol+losartan), L-NAME+avocado, and L-NAME+drugs+avocado. Morphometric indices, lipid profiles, cardiac injury enzymes, and vascular biomarkers were measured after treatment. One-way ANOVA with Tukey test assessed group differences, while contour plots and correlation networks visualized biomarker interactions. Results L-NAME treatment induced a pathological phenotype characterized by reduced feed efficiency (-40%), weight gain (-80%), and BMI (-18%), together with dyslipidemia (LDL +120%, TG +55%, TC +42%, HDL -28%), myocardial stress (troponin +70%, CK +50%, LDH +35%), and vascular activation (endothelin +350%, VCAM-1 +55%, AngII +80%; all p < 0.01). Avocado supplementation mitigated these effects: BMI and feed efficiency returned to near-control levels, LDL, TG, and TC fell by 30-45%, and troponin, CK, and LDH decreased by ~25-30%. Endothelin, VCAM-1, and AngII were reduced by 40-55% relative to L-NAME. Network analysis revealed dense pathological correlations under L-NAME (density 0.42), simplified under avocado (0.17), and most normalized with avocado+drugs (0.09), indicating restoration of physiological biomarker independence. Conclusion Avocado supplementation attenuates L-NAME-induced vascular injury by improving metabolic efficiency, correcting dyslipidemia, reducing cardiac injury, and dampening endothelial activation, while reprogramming pathological biomarker networks toward control-like organization
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amadi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: