| Literature DB >> 22883637 |
Kiessoun Konaté1, Imaël Henri Nestor Bassolé, Adama Hilou, Raïssa R R Aworet-Samseny, Alain Souza, Nicolas Barro, Mamoudou H Dicko, Jacques Y Datté, Bertrand M'Batchi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sida acuta Burn f. and Sida cordifolia L. (Malvaceae) are traditionally used in Burkina Faso to treat several ailments, mainly pains, including abdominal infections and associated diseases. Despite the extensive use of these plants in traditional health care, literature provides little information regarding their toxicity and the pharmacology. This work was therefore designed to investigate the toxicological effects of aqueous acetone extracts of Sida acuta Burn f. and Sida cordifolia L. Furthermore, their analgesic capacity was assessed, in order to assess the efficiency of the traditional use of these two medicinal plants from Burkina Faso.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22883637 PMCID: PMC3478230 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6882-12-120
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Complement Altern Med ISSN: 1472-6882 Impact factor: 3.659
Figure 1Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on body weights (g) of Wistar rats with the time of treatment. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p>0.05, *p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control. Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO. Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight). Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight). Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Figure 2Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on body weights (g) of Wistar rats with the time of treatment. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p>0.05, *p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control. Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO. Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight). Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight). Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Figure 3Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on relative organ weights (g) of rats. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p>0.05, *p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control. Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO. Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight). Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight). Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Figure 4Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on relative organ weights (g) of rats. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p>0.05, *p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control. Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO. Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight). Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight). Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extracts of and on the haematological parameters on whole blood of rats
| WBC(103/μl) | 12.43 ± 3.20 | 12.19 ± 0.10ns | 11.69 ± 1.20ns | 11.77 ± 0.11ns |
| RBC (106/μl) | 7.17 ± 1.18 | 7.23 ± 2.36ns | 7.13 ± 1.03ns | 7.08 ± 0.88ns |
| Eosinophil (%) | 2.18 ± 0.68 | 2.21 ± 1.08ns | 2.00 ± 2.20ns | 2.11 ± 4.53ns |
| Lymphocyte (%) | 78.11 ± 0.24 | 77.85 ± 1.57ns | 77.69 ± 1.43ns | 78.00 ± 2.21ns |
| Neutrophil (%) | 25.89 ± 0.09 | 25.78 ± 0.31ns | 25.59 ± 1.43ns | 25.81 ± 1.21ns |
| Monocyte (%) | 1.57 ± 0.24 | 1.02 ± 1.20* | 1.00 ± 1.43* | 0.91 ± 1.21* |
| Basophil (%) | 0.17 ± 0.09 | 0.13 ± 0.31ns | 0.11 ± 0.43** | 0.12 ± 0.22ns |
| Haemoglobin (g/dl) | 15.23 ± 1.13 | 14.69 ± 0.15ns | 14.21 ± 0.63* | 14.11 ± 0.77 * |
| Haematocrit (%) | 43.46 ± 2.20 | 44.00 ± 1.21ns | 42.43 ± 3.20* | 40.61 ± 1.2** |
| MCV (μm3) | 57.00 ± 0.48 | 56.48 ± 1.28ns | 55.35 ± 0.15* | 54.79 ± 2.30** |
| MCH (pg) | 18.87 ± 1.20 | 18.62 ± 0.43ns | 18.90 ± 1.22ns | 18.49 ± 0.67ns |
| MCHC (g/dl) | 33.78 ± 0.11 | 33.35 ± 2.22ns | 33.00 ± 0.40ns | 33.13 ± 1.22ns |
| Platelet (x103/μl) | 967.42 ± 4.12 | 961.11 ± 5.10 ns | 953.22 ± 2.35 ns | 964.00 ± 1.10 ns |
| WBC(103/μl) | 12.21 ± 2.21 | 12.08 ± 0.54ns | 12.00 ± 1.10ns | 12.02 ± 1.22ns |
| RBC (106/μl) | 7.29 ± 0.21 | 7.45 ± 0.15ns | 7.22 ± 0.59ns | 7.10 ± 0.27ns |
| Eosinophil (%) | 2.23 ± 1.03 | 2.14 ± 0.56ns | 2.00 ± 0.53ns | 2.17 ± 4.53ns |
| Lymphocyte (%) | 78. 31 ± 1.03 | 77.60 ± 0.88ns | 77.62 ± 1.20ns | 76.89 ± 0.22* |
| Neutrophil (%) | 26.13 ± 0.68 | 26.00 ± 1.08ns | 25.78 ± 2.15ns | 26.13 ± 2.33ns |
| Monocyte (%) | 2.01 ± 0.09 | 0.76 ± 0.31* | 0.82 ± 1.43* | 0.91 ± 1.21* |
| Basophil (%) | 0.2 ± 0.24 | 0.17 ± 0.10ns | 0.17 ± 1.25ns | 0.13 ± 0.36* |
| Haemoglobin (g/dl) | 15.02 ± 1.43 | 14.40 ± 0.31ns | 14.23 ± 0.54ns | 14.75 ± 1.21ns |
| Haematocrit (%) | 42.83 ± 2.21 | 42.60 ± 1.10ns | 41.67 ± 0.33* | 42.00 ± 0.22ns |
| MCV (μm3) | 56.78 ± 0.15 | 56.62 ± 0.34ns | 56.41 ± 2.10ns | 56.80 ± 0.33ns |
| MCH (pg) | 19.61 ± 0.24 | 19.57 ± 0.22ns | 19.07 ± 1.20ns | 19.55 ± 0.36ns |
| MCHC (g/dl) | 33.26 ± 0.1 | 33.51 ± 0.54ns | 33.37 ± 2.21ns | 33.00 ± 0.2ns |
| Platelet (x103/μl) | 960.11 ± 0.33 | 957.23 ± 0.67ns | 963.47 ± 1.63ns | 966.40 ± 0.67ns |
WBC: leucocyte count; RBC: erythrocyte count; MCV: mean corpuscular volume; MCH: mean corpuscular haemoglobin; MCHC: mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration.
Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p>0.05, *p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control
Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO.
Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight).
Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight).
Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extracts of and on the biochemical parameters in the plasma and the serum of rats
| Glucose (mmol/l) | 6.21 ± 1.12 | 4.28 ± 0.022** | 3.17 ± 0.11** | 3.39 ± 0.01** |
| Uric acid (mmol/l) | 0.17 ± 1.18 | 0.12 ± 0.02ns | 0.12 ± 0.01ns | 0.14 ± 0.33ns |
| Urea nitrogen (mmol/l) | 9.64 ± 0.1 | 9.41 ± 0.22ns | 9.44 ± 0.03ns | 9.46 ± 0.02ns |
| Creatinine (mmol/l) | 0.053 ± 0.01 | 0.047 ± 0.001ns | 0.048 ± 0.003* | 0.051 ± 0.01* |
| AST (UI/l) | 79.5 ± 2.20 | 100 ± 0.54** | 103.00 ± 3.20** | 105.33 ± 1.11** |
| ALT (UI/l) | 39.5 ± 5.40 | 81.00 ± 13.18** | 77.5 ± 1.10** | 89.00 ± 0.67** |
| ALP (UI/l) | 71.5 ± 2.00 | 106.13 ± 2.40** | 109.22 ± 1.20** | 110 ± 2.18** |
| Triglycerides (mmol/l) | 0.80 ± 0.06 | 0.70 ± 0.03ns | 0.73 ± 0.03* | 0.74 ± 0.01* |
| Total cholesterol (mmol/l) | 2.15 ± 0.33 | 2.03 ± 0.01ns | 2.07 ± 0.02ns | 2.08 ± 0.01ns |
| Total bilirubin (mmol/l) | 0.14 ± 0.01 | 0.12 ± 0.03ns | 0.12 ± 0.01ns | 0.13 ± 0.02ns |
| Direct bilirubin (mmol/l) | 0.0013 ± 0.11 | 0.0012 ± 1.10ns | 0.0011 ± 0.01ns | 0.0013 ± 0.01ns |
| Glucose (mmol/l) | 6.30 ± 0.10 | 4.41 ± 033** | 3.51 ± 0.11** | 3.60 ± 0.67** |
| Uric acid (mmol/l) | 0.173 ± 1.10 | 0.170 ± 0.21ns | 0.169 ± 0.33ns | 0.171 ± 0.22ns |
| Urea nitrogen (mmol/l) | 9.61 ± 0.33 | 9.49 ± 2.20ns | 9.55 ± 0.67ns | 9.58 ± 1.21* |
| Creatinine (mmol/l) | 0.053 ± 0.11 | 0.034 ± 1.22ns | 0.044 ± 0.04ns | 0.047 ± 0.01* |
| AST (UI/l) | 84.12 ± 2.20 | 97.67 ± 3.10** | 100.60 ± 1.21** | 102.33 ± 0.33** |
| ALT (UI/l) | 41.62 ± 11.61 | 51.21 ± 5.44** | 80.12 ± 13.67** | 89.55 ± 0.54** |
| ALP (UI/l) | 73.51 ± 1.74 | 88.12 ± 2.21** | 105.33 ± 0.33** | 107.33 ± 1.67** |
| Triglycerides (mmol/l) | 0.58 ± 1.15 | 0.57 ± 0.33ns | 0.55 ± 0.67* | 0.57 ± 0.54* |
| Total cholesterol (mmol/l) | 2.10 ± 0.33 | 1.62 ± 0.15ns | 1.85 ± 0.01ns | 2.01 ± 0.67ns |
| Total bilirubin (mmol/l) | 0.2 ± 0.071 | 0.121 ± 0.33* | 0.130 ± 0.033ns | 0.159 ± 0.067** |
| Direct bilirubin (mmol/l) | 0.0034 ± 0.67 | 0.0024 ± 0.10ns | 0.0026 ± 0.11ns | 0.0029 ± 0.67* |
AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; ALP: alkaline phosphatase.
Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control:
p>0.05,*p <0.05, **p <0.01 compared with control.
Group 1: control, rats received 10% DMSO
Group 2: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (75 mg/kg body weight).
Group 3: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (100 mg/kg body weight).
Group 4: rats received 10% DMSO with extract (200 mg/kg body weight).
Figure 5Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on writhing-induced by acetic acid. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: *p <0.05 compared with control.
Figure 6Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on writhing-induced by acetic acid. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: *p <0.05 compared with control.
Figure 7Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on licking the hind paw-induced by formalin injection. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p <0.01.
Figure 8Effect of Aqueous Acetone Extract of on licking the hind paw-induced by formalin injection. Values are mean ± S.E.M. (n = 6 in each group) one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s t- test: Compare all vs. control: p <0.01.