| Literature DB >> 22761611 |
Dhirender Kaushik1, Ajay Kumar, Pawan Kaushik, A C Rana.
Abstract
The Chir Pine, Pinus roxburghii, named after William Roxburgh, is a pine native to the Himalaya. Pinus roxburghii Sarg. (Pinaceae) is traditionally used for several medicinal purposes in India. As the oil of the plant is extensively used in number of herbal preparation for curing inflammatory disorders, the present study was undertaken to assess analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities of its bark extract. Dried and crushed leaves of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. were defatted with petroleum ether and then extracted with alcohol. The alcoholic extract at the doses of 100 mg/kg, 300 mg/kg, and 500 mg/kg body weight was subjected to evaluation of analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities in experimental animal models. Analgesic activity was evaluated by acetic acid-induced writhing and tail immersion tests in Swiss albino mice; acute and chronic anti-inflammatory activity was evaluated by carrageenan-induced paw oedema and cotton pellet granuloma in Wistar albino rats. Diclofenac sodium and indomethacin were employed as reference drugs for analgesic and anti-inflammatory studies, respectively. In the present study, the alcoholic bark extract of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. demonstrated significant analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities in the tested models.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22761611 PMCID: PMC3384912 DOI: 10.1155/2012/245431
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Pharmacol Sci ISSN: 1687-6334
Figure 1HPLC analysis of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. (Pinaceae) showing presence of chlorogenic acid (1), rutin (2) and quercetin (3).
Protective efeect of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. on paw edema induced by carrageenan in rat.
| Change in paw volume (mL) Mean ± SEM | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groups | Drug (dose), route | Time (hr) | |||
| 1 hr | 2 hr | 3 hr | 4 hr | ||
| Control | Tween 80 (5%) p.o | 0.71 ± 0.12 | 0.93 ± 0.01 | 1.8 ± 0.03 | 1.9 ± 0.02 |
| Standard | Indomethacin (10 mg/kg), p.o | 0.21 ± 0.06 (70.4) | 0.23 ± 0.02** (75.26) | 0.41 ± 0.01** (77.22) | 0.35 ± 0.09 (81.56) |
| AB | 100 mg/kg, p.o | 0.61 ± 0.17 (14.08) | 0.92 ± 0.17 (1.07) | 0.89 ± 0.13** (50.55) | 1.07 ± 0.19 (43.68) |
| AB | 300 mg/kg, p.o | 0.63 ± 0.14 (11.21) | 0.78 ± 0.19 (16.12) | 0.79 ± 0.20** (56.11) | 1.87 ± 0.14 (1.57) |
| AB | 500 mg/kg, p.o | 0.39 ± 0.12 (45.07) | 0.52 ± 0.13 (44.08) | 0.68 ± 0.11** (62.22) | 0.68 ± 0.11 (64.21) |
n = 5. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM. Percentage inhibition are in brackets.
*P > 0.05, **P < 0.01 as compared to control, AB = alcoholic bark extract.
Protective efeect of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. on cotton pellet induced granuloma.
| Groups | Drug (dose), route | Weight of dry Cotton Pellet Granuloma (mg) | % protection |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Tween 80 (5%) p.o | 202 ± 0.23 | 0 |
| Standard | Indomethacin (10 mg/kg), p.o | 14.4 ± 3.3** | 92.87 |
| AB | 100 mg/kg, p.o | 139 ± 3.2 | 31.11 |
| AB | 300 mg/kg, p.o | 129 ± 1.1 | 36.13 |
| AB | 500 mg/kg, p.o | 87 ± 9.1** | 56.93 |
n = 5. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P > 0.05, **P < 0.01 as compared to control, AB = alcoholic bark extract.
Protective efeect of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. on writhing induced by acetic acid.
| Groups | Drug (dose), route | No of wriths (Mean ± SEM) | % Protection |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Acetic acid (0.6% V/V), i.p | 42 ± 11.6 | 0 |
| Standard | Diclofenac Sodium (50 mg/kg), p.o | 4.2 ± 1.0** | 90 |
| AB | 100 mg/kg, p.o | 25.4 ± 4.8 | 39.52 |
| AB | 300 mg/kg, p.o | 17.4 ± 1.9** | 58.57 |
| AB | 500 mg/kg, p.o | 8.0 ± 2.0** | 80.95 |
n = 5. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P > 0.05, **P < 0.01 as compared to control, AB = alcoholic bark extract.
Protective efeect of Pinus roxburghii Sarg. on tail withdrawal reflex induced by tail immersion.
| Groups | Drug (dose), route | Reaction time (min) Mean ± SEM | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 min | 60 min | 90 min | 120 min | ||
| Control | Tween 80 (5%), p.o | 1.0 ± 0.1 | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | 2.8 ± 0.2 |
| Standard | Diclofenac sodium (50 mg/kg), p.o | 5.8 ± 0.2** | 8.2 ± 0.2** | 8.4 ± 0.2** | 8.8 ± 0.2** |
| AB | 100 mg/kg, p.o | 1.4 ± 0.2 | 2.4 ± 0.3 | 2.8 ± 0.2 | 3.4 ± 0.2 |
| AB | 300 mg/kg, p.o | 1.8 ± 0.2 | 3.2 ± 0.2* | 4.4 ± 0.4* | 6.2 ± 1.5* |
| AB | 500 mg/kg, p.o | 2.8 ± 0.4** | 3.2 ± 0.4* | 4.6 ± 0.2* | 5.4 ± 1.9 |
n = 5. Results are expressed as mean ± SEM. *P > 0.05, **P < 0.01 as compared to control, AB = alcoholic bark extract.