| Literature DB >> 28573227 |
Ren Guibing1, Zhang Xiping2,3, Ding Xiaowen3, Zou Dehong3, Yang Hongjiang3, Meng Xiaoru1, Mo Wenju3, He Xiangming3, Zhao Shuai3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) and obstructive jaundice (OJ) are frequent recurring diseases that bring about huge threat to human health. Some reports have demonstrated that Salviae miltiorrhizae can protect multiple organs of SAP and OJ model animals or patients, but their related mechanisms were not clear. In this study, we observed the effects of Salvia miltiorrhizae injection on apoptosis and NF-κB expression in kidney and explored the protective effect and mechanism of Salvia miltiorrhizae on the kidney of SAP or OJ rats. The results obtained will provide a theoretical basis for clinical application of Salvia miltiorrhizae.Entities:
Keywords: Bax; NF-κB; Salvia miltiorrhizae; apoptosis; kidney; obstructive jaundice; rats; severe acute pancreatitis; traditional Chinese medicine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28573227 PMCID: PMC5446434 DOI: 10.21010/ajtcam.v14i2.12
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Afr J Tradit Complement Altern Med ISSN: 2505-0044
Comparison of mortality rate of SAP-associated groups
| Time | N(case) | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Note: Compared with sham-operated group,
P<0.05
Comparison of serum BUN and CREA of SAP groups (M(QR))
| Index | Time | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUN | 3h | 5.7(1.0) | 11.2(1.9) | 10.4(3.3) |
| 6h | 6.1(0.7) | 13.4(4.0) | 11.4(3.2) | |
| 12h | 6.1(0.8) | 17.0(6.1) | 12.9(4.1) | |
| CREA | 3h | 24.8±8.0 | 48.6±14.6 | 40.8±8.7 |
| 6h | 29.9±3.2 | 55.5±15.1 | 39.8± 14.1 | |
| 12h | 28.0±2.5 | 54.6±10.3 | 38.70±13.5 |
Note: Compared with sham-operated group
P<0.01
P<0.001
Compared with model control group,
P<0.01,
P<0.001
Figure 4Treated group-12h (Renal tissue structure was clear, glomerular lesions were not obvious, and renal tubular epithelial cells were mild degeneration and necrosis) HE×200
Comparison of different pathological indexes of SAP groups (M(QR))
| Index | Time | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pathological score | 3h | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(0.0) | 1.0(0.0) |
| 6h | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(1.0) | 1.0(0.0) | |
| 12h | 0.0(1.0) | 2.0(1.0) | 1.0(0.0) | |
| Bax staining intensity | 3h | 0.0(0.5) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.0) |
| 6h | 0.0(0.5) | 1.0(1.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| 12h | 0.0(0.0) | 1.0(0.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| product of Bax staining intensity and positive staining rate apoptoic index | 3h | 0.0(0.5) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.5) |
| 6h | 0.0(0.5) | 2.0(2.5) | 0.0(2.0) | |
| 12h | 0.0(0.0) | 2.0(0.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| 3h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.0) | |
| 6h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.03) | 0.0(0.0) | |
| 12h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.0) | |
| 3h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(1.0) | 0.0(0.0) | |
| 6h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.5(1.5) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| 12h | 0.0(0.5) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| product of NF-κB staining intensity and positive staining rate | 3h | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(2.0) | 0.0(0.0) |
| 6h | 0.0(0.0) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.5) | |
| 12h | 0.0(0.5) | 2.0(4.0) | 0.0(2.0) |
Note: Compared with sham-operated group,
P<0.01,
P<0.001;
Compared with model control group,
P<0.01,
P<0.001
Figure 7Treated group -6h Expression (-) Bax×200
Figure 10Treated group-6h (Few apoptotic cells were seen apoptotic cells were renal tubular epithelial cells especially obvious in the proximal tubules) TUNEL×200
Figure 13Treated group-12h Expression (+) NF-κB×200
Comparison of mortality rate of OJ-associated groups
| Time | N(case) | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7d | 15 | 15 | 13 | 15 |
| 14d | 15 | 15 | 11 | 12 |
| 21d | 15 | 15 | 11 | 13 |
| 28d | 15 | 15 | 8 | 11 |
Note: Compared with sham-operated group,
P<0.05,
P<0.01;
Compared with treated group,
P<0.05
Comparison of BUN and CREA of OJ groups (M(QR))
| Index | Time | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUN | 7d | 6.1(1.5) | 8.6(1.7) | 7.9(1.6) |
| 14d | 7.4(2.0) | 8.1(1.8) | 7.2 (2.2) | |
| 21d | 6.8(1.6) | 7.1(1.4) | 7.4(1.1) | |
| 28d | 7.5(1.5) | 11.2 (5.3) | 8.6(3.1) | |
| CREA | 7d | 29.3±7.1 | 42.9±12.9 | 37.7±6.2 |
| 14d | 32.3±12.8 | 50.3±8.6 | 43.4±5.9 | |
| 21d | 27.5±5.1 | 52.7±4.9 | 40.5±7.1 | |
| 28d | 27.9±5.4 | 53.3±3.2 | 42.8±7.2 |
Note: Compared with sham-operated group,
P<0.05,
P<0.01;
Compared with model control group,
P<0.05,
P<0.01
Figure 17Treated group-21d (Scattered calcified foci in the renal tubular or blood vessel were seen) HE×100
Figure 23Treated group-28d (The microvilli in proximal tubules were arranged disorderly, and bile pigment was deposited within or outside the lumen) Electron microscope×3700
The standard of pathological severity score of kidney
| score | Standard |
|---|---|
| 1 | Hyperplasia of endothelial cells, 0.2 points; hyperplasia of epithelial cells, 0.2 points; hyperplasia of mesangial cells, 0.2 points; hyperplasia of basement membrane, 0.2 points; widening of capillary basement membrane, 0.2 points |
| 2 | Epithelial swelling or necrosis in proximal tubules, 0.4 points; bile pigment deposition, 0.4 points; epithelial swelling or necrosis in distal tubules, 0.4 points; bile pigment casts within the lumen, 0.4 points |
| 3 | Patchy necrosis in renal tubules + bile pigment deposition |
| 4 | Two points of the above-mentioned contents + three points of the above-mentioned contents |
| 5 | Four points of the above-mentioned contents + inflammatory cell infiltration/ hyperplasia or edema in the connective tissue |
Comparison of different pathological indexes of OJ groups (M(QR))
| Index | Time | Sham-operated group | Model control group | Treated group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pathological score | 7d | 0.0 (0.4) | 1.2 (1.0) | 1.0 (1.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(0.2) | 3.0 (2.0) | 3.0 (1.5) | |
| 21d | 0.0 (0.2) | 5.0 (0.0) | 5.0 (0.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(0.2) | 5.0 (1.5) | 3.0 (2.0) | |
| Bax staining intensity | 7d | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(2.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| 21d | 0.0(2.0) | 2.0(1.0) | 0.0(2.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0(1.0) | |
| product of Bax staining intensity and positive staining rate | 7d | 0.0 (1.0) | 1.0 | 0.0 (2.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(1.0) | 1.0(2.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | |
| 21d | 0.0 (2.0) | 2.0 (3.0) | 0.0 (2.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(1.0) | 0.5 (1.5) | 0.0 (2.0) | |
| apoptoic index | 7d | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0(0.01) | 0.0 (0.0) | |
| 21d | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | |
| NF-κB staining intensity | 7d | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.0 (1.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(1.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | |
| 21d | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(0.0) | 1.0 (1.5) | 0.0 (1.0) | |
| product of NF-κB staining intensity and positive staining rate | 7d | 0.0 (0.0) | 0.0 (1.0) | 0.0 (1.0) |
| 14d | 0.0(1.0) | 0.0 (2.0) | 0.0 (1.5) | |
| 21d | 0.0 (2.0) | 0.0 (2.0) | 0.0 (0.0) | |
| 28d | 0.0(0.0) | 1.5 (3.5) | 0.0 (2.0) |
Note: Compared with sham-operated group,
P<0.05,
P<0.01;
Compare with model control group,
P<0.05,
P<0.01
Figure 29Sham-operated group -28d Expression (+) Bax×200
Figure 30Model control group-14d (Apoptosis of tubular epithelial cells) tunel×200
Figure 31Treated group-14d (Apoptosis of tubular epithelial cells) tunel×200
Figure 35Treated group-21d Expression (++) NF-κB×200