Letícia M Ricardo1, Bianca M Dias2, Fernanda L B Mügge2, Viviane V Leite3, Maria G L Brandão4. 1. Centro Especializado em Plantas Aromáticas, Medicinais e Tóxicas (CEPLAMT), Museu de História Natural e Jardim Botânico, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Faculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil; Departamento de Assistência Farmacêutica e Insumos Estratégicos, Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos, Ministério da Saúde, Brasília, DF, Brazil. 2. Centro Especializado em Plantas Aromáticas, Medicinais e Tóxicas (CEPLAMT), Museu de História Natural e Jardim Botânico, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. 3. Centro Especializado em Plantas Aromáticas, Medicinais e Tóxicas (CEPLAMT), Museu de História Natural e Jardim Botânico, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil; Hospital Publico Regional de Betim, Prefeitura Municipal de Betim, MG, Brazil. 4. Centro Especializado em Plantas Aromáticas, Medicinais e Tóxicas (CEPLAMT), Museu de História Natural e Jardim Botânico, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Medicamentos e Assistência Farmacêutica, Faculdade de Farmácia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil. Electronic address: mbrandao@farmacia.ufmg.br.
Abstract
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes the potential of plants used in secular traditional medicine and considers this an important source of evidence to assess their effectiveness and safety. Brazil is rich in biodiversity and traditional uses based on the Amerindian culture. However, many processes started with the arrival of the Portuguese in the year 1500. The successive economic cycles, for example, led to destruction of native vegetation and an intense cultural erosion. As a consequence, the information about the use of plants in the past centuries are dispersed and without interpretation. In this study a methodology to evidence the traditionality of Brazilian plants was demonstrated using data about barbatimão barks (Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville - Fabaceae) and Copaiba oleoresin (Copaifera spp. - Fabaceae) in wound healing, was established. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data about use of the plants were recovered from bibliography published between 1576 and 2011. The books (101) were classified using weights, considering the date of publication and the source of Information. Older books that describe primary information received weight 10, while books written more recently and with secondary information received weight 0.4. A score for each category of medicinal use was calculated based on the books weights and the frequency of citation. A review about the current use of both plants was also performed from ethnobotanical studies published in journals. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The traditional secular use of barks of barbatimão and oleoresin of copaiba to treat wounds was confirmed based on the historic bibliographic research. The most frequent use of barbatimão in a timeline of 500 years of Brazil's history, was as astringent, whereas for copaíba was as healing of skin and mucosal lesions. The continuous and current use of these plants to treat wounds, confirmed by recent ethnobotanical studies, is an indicative of the resilience of these remedies and their effectiveness. CONCLUSION: The use of preparations containing barbatimão barks and copaiba oleoresin can be considered effective in the treatment of wounds. Nonetheless, it is necessary to improve the quality of the formulas as established by WHO.
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: The World Health Organization (WHO) recognizes the potential of plants used in secular traditional medicine and considers this an important source of evidence to assess their effectiveness and safety. Brazil is rich in biodiversity and traditional uses based on the Amerindian culture. However, many processes started with the arrival of the Portuguese in the year 1500. The successive economic cycles, for example, led to destruction of native vegetation and an intense cultural erosion. As a consequence, the information about the use of plants in the past centuries are dispersed and without interpretation. In this study a methodology to evidence the traditionality of Brazilian plants was demonstrated using data about barbatimão barks (Stryphnodendron adstringens (Mart.) Coville - Fabaceae) and Copaiba oleoresin (Copaifera spp. - Fabaceae) in wound healing, was established. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data about use of the plants were recovered from bibliography published between 1576 and 2011. The books (101) were classified using weights, considering the date of publication and the source of Information. Older books that describe primary information received weight 10, while books written more recently and with secondary information received weight 0.4. A score for each category of medicinal use was calculated based on the books weights and the frequency of citation. A review about the current use of both plants was also performed from ethnobotanical studies published in journals. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The traditional secular use of barks of barbatimão and oleoresin of copaiba to treat wounds was confirmed based on the historic bibliographic research. The most frequent use of barbatimão in a timeline of 500 years of Brazil's history, was as astringent, whereas for copaíba was as healing of skin and mucosal lesions. The continuous and current use of these plants to treat wounds, confirmed by recent ethnobotanical studies, is an indicative of the resilience of these remedies and their effectiveness. CONCLUSION: The use of preparations containing barbatimão barks and copaiba oleoresin can be considered effective in the treatment of wounds. Nonetheless, it is necessary to improve the quality of the formulas as established by WHO.
Authors: Neida L Pellenz; Fernanda Barbisan; Veronica F Azzolin; Thiago Duarte; Aline Bolignon; Moisés H Mastella; Cibele F Teixeira; Euler E Ribeiro; Ivana B Mânica da Cruz; Marta M M F Duarte Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: José Tarcísio de Giffoni de Carvalho; Débora da Silva Baldivia; Daniel Ferreira Leite; Laura Costa Alves de Araújo; Priscilla Pereira de Toledo Espindola; Katia Avila Antunes; Paola Santos Rocha; Kely de Picoli Souza; Edson Lucas Dos Santos Journal: Oxid Med Cell Longev Date: 2019-08-25 Impact factor: 6.543
Authors: Rafael M Palhares; Leopoldo C Baratto; Marina Scopel; Fernanda L B Mügge; Maria G L Brandão Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2021-01-27 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Alexsander R Carvalho; Roseana M Diniz; Mariela A M Suarez; Cristiane S S E S Figueiredo; Adrielle Zagmignan; Marcos A G Grisotto; Elizabeth S Fernandes; Luís C N da Silva Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 5.810