| Literature DB >> 25699088 |
Nurul Elyani Mohamad1, Swee Keong Yeap2, Kian Lam Lim3, Hamidah Mohd Yusof1, Boon Kee Beh3, Sheau Wei Tan2, Wan Yong Ho4, Shaiful Adzni Sharifuddin5, Anisah Jamaluddin5, Kamariah Long5, Nik Mohd Afizan Nik Abd Rahman1, Noorjahan Banu Alitheen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pineapple (Ananas comosus) was demonstrated to be hepatoprotective. This study aims to investigate the reversing effects of pineapple vinegar on paracetamol-induced liver damage in murine model.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25699088 PMCID: PMC4333164 DOI: 10.1186/s13020-015-0030-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chin Med ISSN: 1749-8546 Impact factor: 5.455
Serum biochemical parameters of different experimental groups on paracetamol (PCM) induced hepatotoxicity in mice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 61.23 ± 5.57* | 85.67 ± 2.32* | 145.20 ± 15.15* | 2.33 ± 0.64* |
| 2 | 123.94 ± 7.25 | 104.44 ± 2.31 | 368.76 ± 9.83 | 3.44 ± 0.56 |
| 3 | 72.44 ± 8.23* | 81.75 ± 1.51* | 250.46 ± 11.14* | 2.11 ± 0.24* |
| 4 | 45.44 ± 2.63* | 85.83 ± 2.55* | 172.64 ± 10.58* | 2.53 ± 1.11* |
| 5 | 76.53 ± 4.15* | 91.83 ± 1.25* | 235.96 ± 13.19* | 2.63 ± 1.06* |
| 6 | 45.26 ± 7.59* | 75.75 ± 1.77* | 184.03 ± 28.88* | 1.99 ± 0.46* |
| 7 | 74.31 ± 7.35* | 85.75 ± 2.88* | 239.33 ± 28.24* | 2.83 ± 0.69* |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD where *indicates that the values are significantly difference from paracetamol control group, P < 0.05.
Group1: normal mice; group 2: paracetamol control (250 mg/kg PCM + PBS); group 3: positive control (250 mg/kg PCM + 50 mg/kg silybin); group 4: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 2 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 5: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 0.08 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 6: 250 mg/kg PCM + 2 mL/kg pineapple vinegar; group 7: 250 mg/kg PCM + 0.08 mL/kg pineapple vinegar.
Liver antioxidant and NO determination of different experimental groups on paracetamol (PCM) induced hepatotoxicity in mice
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 4.16 ± 0.04* | 122.18 ± 1.09* | 21.13 ± 1.99* | 1.53 ± 0.28* | 20.71 ± 2.67* |
|
| 2.55 ± 0.03 | 41.50 ± 1.38 | 12.77 ± 1.68 | 5.14 ± 0.10 | 44.74 ± 1.05 |
|
| 4.63 ± 0.03* | 145.47 ± 2.87* | 20.73 ± 1.78* | 1.63 ± 0.21* | 27.61 ± 3.08* |
|
| 4.78 ± 0.01* | 125.33 ± 1.65* | 20.77 ± 5.85* | 1.65 ± 0.24* | 32.45 ± 3.21* |
|
| 4.26 ± 0.04* | 84.99 ± 2.53* | 14.78 ± 3.30 | 2.50 ± 0.57* | 36.68 ± 6.20 |
|
| 7.57 ± 0.12* | 203.53 ± 3.64* | 26.02 ± 2.10* | 1.51 ± 0.01* | 19.74 ± 0.87* |
|
| 5.54 ± 0.03* | 139.55 ± 1.52* | 20.87 ± 2.65* | 1.56 ± 0.09* | 31.66 ± 4.87* |
Values are expressed as mean ± SD where * indicates that the values are significantly difference from paracetamol control group, P < 0.05.
Group1: normal mice; group 2: paracetamol control (250 mg/kg PCM + PBS); group 3: positive control (250 mg/kg PCM + 50 mg/kg silybin); group 4: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 2 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 5: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 0.08 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 6: 250 mg/kg PCM + 2 mL/kg pineapple vinegar; group 7: 250 mg/kg PCM + 0.08 mL/kg pineapple vinegar.
Figure 1Histopathological change in liver (H&E stanining). Photomicrograph of liver section (40 x) for (A) normal hepatocytes; (B) untreated group (negative control) after administration of 250 mg/kg paracetamol showing microvesicular steatosis (arrow) in the liver parenchyma; (C) paracetamol group after administration of 50 mg/kg silybin showing minimal microvesicular steatosis; (D) paracetamol group after administration of 2 mL/kg of synthetic vinegar showing the development of microvesicular steatosis (arrow) in the liver parenchyma; (E) paracetamol group after administration of 0.08 mL/kg of synthetic vinegar with recovery effect of microvesicular steatosis; (F) paracetamol group after administration of 2 mL/kg of pineapple vinegar showing the lesser development of microvesicular steatosis (arrow) in the liver parenchyma; (G) paracetamol group after administration of 0.08 mL/kg of pineapple vinegar with recovery effect of fatty changes. CV is central vain; arrow indicates microvesicular steatosis.
Figure 2Liver gene expressions. Downregulation of iNOS and NF-κB in different treatment groups of paracetamol induced liver damage in mice. Relative expression of iNOS and NF-κB genes by different treatment groups were normalized to the expression of the paracetamol control group. Group 1: normal mice; group 2: paracetamol control (250 mg/kg PCM + PBS); group 3: positive control (250 mg/kg PCM + 50 mg/kg silybin); group 4: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 2 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 5: acetic acid control (250 mg/kg PCM + 0.08 mL/kg synthetic vinegar; group 6: 250 mg/kg PCM + pineapple vinegar (2 mL/kg); group 7: 250 mg/kg PCM + pineapple vinegar (0.08 mL/kg). Values were significant difference compared with paracetamol control group, P < 0.05. Values are expressed as mean ± SD where * indicates that the values are significantly difference from paracetamol control group, P < 0.05.
Figure 3Liver P450 expressions. Protein samples were subjected to electro-transfer to a nitrocellulose membrane, incubated with primary antibodies against ACTB and anti-rabbit secondary antibodies conjugated with HRP. Lane 1: normal; lane 2: untreated; lane 3: silybin; lane 4: synthetic vinegar (2 mL/kg); lane 5: synthetic vinegar (0.08 mL/kg); lane 6: pineapple vinegar (2 mL/kg); lane 7: pineapple vinegar (0.08 mL/kg).
Total phenolic, soluble phenolic acids content, DPPH and FRAP of pineapple vinegar
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Total phenolic content (μg GAE/mL) | 169.67 ± 0.05 | ND |
| Phenolic acid derivatives (HPLC): | ||
| Gallic acid (μg/mL) | 862.61 ± 4.38 | ND |
| Caffeic acid (μg/mL) | 218.91 ± 3.24 | ND |
| Benzoic acid (μg/mL) | 177.90 ± 14.02 | ND |
| Sinapic acid (μg/mL) | 154.28 ± 4.09 | ND |
| Vanillic acid (μg/mL) | 117.35 ± 3.99 | ND |
| β-hydroxybenzoic (μg/mL) | 83.99 ± 1.15 | ND |
| Protocatechuic acid (μg/mL) | 78.75 ± 1.70 | ND |
| Syringic acid (μg/mL) | 55.46 ± 9.51 | ND |
| DPPH (%) | 69.28 ± 0.18 | ND |
| FRAP (μg TE/mL) | 357.72 ± 0.07 | ND |
ND indicates not detected.