Assessment of Biochemical Effect of “Power Horse” Energy Drink on Hepatic, Renal and Histological Functions in Sprague Dawley Rats

Objective: Energy drinks are popular and widespread and raising concerns about implications on human health. Hepatological, histological and renal function tests of Sprague-Dawley albino rats were investigated in rat liver, brain and kidney by administering “power-horse” energy drink. Methodology: For this study twenty healthy adult female rats (142 – 148g) were divided into 4 groups with 5 rats in each group and they were treated as follows: Control group was given water only after acclimatization for 28 days when food and water were freely available to the four groups. Low dose group (administered energy drink of 10mg/kg body weight) and high dose group (administered energy drink of 20mg/kg body weight). Recovery groups received high dose of energy drink (20mg/kg body weight) for 14 days and allowed a recovery phase of 7 days thereafter when they received water and standard diet. Rats were sacrificed and blood samples collected through orbital sinus and cardiac puncture. Liver, brain and kidney tissues for all the groups were harvested. Liver and renal function parameters were analyzed while liver; brain and kidney were histologically examined. Results: Serum alanine amino transferase (ALT) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activities increased significantly (p<0.05) in the experimental groups compared with the control (49.83±0.38 U/L, 582.33±9.06 U/L vs. 44.40±0.60 U/L, 331±4.90 U/L) while the activities of ALT and AST in the recovery group reduced, although not significantly (P>0.05) compared with the high dose group. Urea concentrations in the experimental groups increased (P<0.05) significantly compared with the control (10.10±0.15mmol/L vs.3.66±0.10 mmol/L). There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in the concentrations of creatinine in the experimental groups compared with the control group (44.20±00 mmol/L vs. 44.20±02 mmol/L). Serum Na and HCO32- in the experimental groups increased (P<0.05) significantly when compared with the control group (141.07± 0.56, 28.03±0.09 vs. 136.62± 0.72, 23.15±0.65).