| Literature DB >> 26579301 |
Arvindkumar E Ghule1, Suresh S Jadhav2, Subhash L Bodhankar1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate an ethanolic extract of seeds of Linum usitatissimum (Linn.) (EELU) for its renoprotective role in rats through its antihypertensive effect and conservation of biological oxidation enzymes.Entities:
Keywords: Antioxidants; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; EDP, end-diastolic pressure; EELU, ethanolic extract of L. usitatissimum; GPx, glutathione peroxidase; GSH, reduced glutathione; GST, glutathione S transferase; H&E, haematoxylin and eosin; Hypertension; MABP, mean arterial blood pressure; MDA, malondialdehyde; MPO, myeloperoxidase; PI, propidium iodide; RAAS, renin-angiotensin aldosterone system; RIR, renal ischaemia-reperfusion; ROS, reactive oxygen species; Reactive oxygen species; Renal ischaemia reperfusion; SBP, systolic blood pressure; SDG, secoisolariciresinol diglucoside; SOD, superoxide dismutase; dp/dt max, maximum first derivative of ventricular pressure; dp/dt min, minimum first derivative of ventricular pressure
Year: 2011 PMID: 26579301 PMCID: PMC4150603 DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2011.07.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arab J Urol ISSN: 2090-598X
Haemodynamic changes and left ventricular function, renal function, and endogenous antioxidant enzymes and membrane-bound phosphatase enzymes.
| Mean (SEM) variable | Group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sham (I) | RIR (II) | EELU 200 (III) | EELU 400 (IV) | |
| Heart rate, beats/min | 340.4 (11.52) | 436.1 (19.9 | 373.8 (13.80 | 360.4 (16.10 |
| SBP, mmHg | 97.7 (2.4) | 132.1 (2.0 | 124.6 (4.2ns) | 119.9 (3.2 |
| DBP, mmHg | 71.16 (1.57) | 101.6 (1.15 | 96.63 (2.79 | 93.91 (2.77 |
| MABP, mmHg | 82.54 (1.32) | 118.7 (1.48 | 112.0 (2.87ns) | 108.5 (2.39 |
| EDP, mmHg | 4.30 (0.27) | 8.94 (0.40 | 8.53 (0.32ns) | 7.12 (0.57 |
| Max dp/dt, mmHg/s | 1212.1 (184.1) | 2572.2 (296.1 | 1788.4 (236.6ns) | 1245.1 (160.3 |
| Min dp/dt, mmHg/s | −1433.3 (132.3) | – 2617.7 (287.6 | – 1926.1 (374.4ns) | – 1511.2 (230.4 |
| Contractility index | 18.49 (0.88) | 8.64 (0.54 | 12.14 (0.84 | 13.73 (1.45 |
| Exponential | 18.40 (0.65) | 26.49 (1.08 | 22.51 (0.85 | 21.01 (0.99 |
| Pressure–time index | 4.62 (0.048) | 12.64 (0.71 | 9.89 (1.23ns) | 7.81 (0.87 |
| Kidney weight, mg | 756.0 (19.40) | 900.4 (14.19 | 847.8 (19.32ns) | 817.8 (22.77 |
| Urine flow, μL/min/kg | 35.66 (1.18) | 69.24 (4.29 | 54.19 (3.72 | 48.97 (3.65 |
| BUN, mg/dL | 19.7 (1.31) | 63.8 (8.87 | 47.99 (6.61ns) | 30.7 (2.70 |
| Serum creatinine, mg/dL | 1.06 (0.21) | 4.08 (0.33 | 2.58 (0.29 | 1.94 (0.062 |
| TNF-α, pg/mL | 48.7 (13.42) | 223.5 (20.53 | 175.4 (18.90ns) | 132.9 (26.29 |
| MPO, IU/mg protein | 3.13 (0.43) | 10.0 (1.39 | 7.41 (2.16ns) | 4.95 (0.43 |
| SOD, unit/mg protein | 9.67 (1.30) | 3.85 (0.61 | 6.65 (1.65ns) | 8.16 (0.33 |
| GSH, μg/mg protein | 31.57 (1.59) | 20.67 (1.27 | 26.04 (0.52 | 28.47 (1.86 |
| MDA, nmol/mg protein | 2.94 (0.08) | 4.90 (0.42 | 3.90 (0.37ns) | 3.33 (0.37 |
| GPx, μmol/min/mg protein | 24.87 (0.49) | 19.67 (1.2 | 21.80 (0.44ns) | 24.60 (1.0 |
| GST, μmol/min/mg protein | 146.9 (4.71) | 95.8 (6.66 | 110.3 (5.93ns) | 132.7 (6.46 |
| Na+K+-ATPase, μmol inorganic P liberated/mg protein | 6.41 (0.76) | 2.95 (0.60 | 4.15 (0.39ns) | 5.87 (0.70 |
| Mg2+-ATPase, μmol inorganic P liberated/mg protein | 10.69 (1.41) | 4.75 (0.44 | 7.24 (1.26ns) | 9.86 (1.21 |
Data were analysed by one-way anova followed by post hoc Dunnett’s tests, with P < 0.05 considered to indicate significance.
P < 0.05.
P < 0.01.
P < 0.001 vs. sham group.
P < 0.05.
P < 0.01 vs RIR group.
P < 0.05.
P < 0.01.
P < 0.001 vs. RIR group.
Figure 1Effects of EELU on DNA fragmentation in RIR-induced injury in rats: (A) sham, (B) RIR, (C) EELU 200 mg/kg, (D) EELU 400 mg/kg groups.
Figure 2Effect of EELU on cellular necrosis and viability detected in renal cells by flow cytometry using the PI method; PI fluorescence intensity was measured using FL-1. Representative dot-plot images from four experimental groups: (A) sham, (B) RIR, (C) EELU 200 mg/kg, and (D) EELU 400 mg/kg. A histogram of cellular necrosis (E) and viability (F) were plotted; each bar represents the mean ± SEM of four experimental groups. ∗∗∗P < 0.001 vs. RIR group.
Figure 3The effect of EELU treatment on morphological changes assessed by histological examination of the renal cortex of rats by H&E stain (×100). Representative histological images (A) sham group; regular renal tissue with glomeruli (arrow) and tubuli (☆). (B) RIR group, cellular vacuolisation (arrowhead), congestion (arrow), and necrosis (☆); (C) EELU 200 mg/kg, reduced congestion (arrow); and (D) EELU 400 mg/kg showing reduced glomeruli necrosis (arrow) and tubular dilation (☆).