| Literature DB >> 30396308 |
Shengbao Wang1, Xiaoran Li1, Junsheng Bao1, Siyu Chen1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate a Angelica sinensis polysaccharide aqueous extract as a preventive agent in experimentally induced urolithiasis using in- vitro and vivo models.Entities:
Keywords: Angelica sinensis polysaccharide; Urolithiasis; ethylene glycol; kidney injury molecule-1; reactive oxygen species
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30396308 PMCID: PMC6225371 DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2018.1496935
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ren Fail ISSN: 0886-022X Impact factor: 2.606
Figure 1.In vitro experiments to determine calcium oxalate crystallization after the administration of Angelica sinensis polysaccharide and potassium citrate (positive control).The CaOx crystals were observed under an inverted microscope (400×). (A) The blank control group exhibited crystal formation during the inhibition test. (B) 1mg/mL potassium citrate (positive control). (C–F)Angelica sinensis polysaccharide added to the solution containing the crystallization reagents at doses of 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 mg/mL, respectively. (G) Number of crystals in the crystal-formation inhibition tests. Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error. (a) p < .05 versus the blank control group (0 mg/mL Angelica sinensis polysaccharide) and (b) p < .05 versus the positive control group (1.0mg/mL potassium citrate).
Changes in the urine values and serum parameters of the SD rats ().
| Parameter | Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Urine values | |||||
| Uric acid (mmol/L) | 1.38 ± 0.21 | 1.40 ± 0.38 | 1.49 ± 0.13 | 1.51 ± 0.43 | 1.47 ± 0.37 |
| Calcium (mmol/L) | 2.91 ± 0.72 | 2.66 ± 0.24 | 2.71 ± 0.87 | 2.60 ± 1.05 | 2.79 ± 1.32 |
| Oxalate (μmol/L) | 102.3 ± 19.9 | 857.9 ± 96.5a | 869.4 ± 88.3a | 374.6 ± 37.0abc | 190.1 ± 35.3abcd |
| Magnesium (μmol/L) | 5.32 ± 1.33 | 5.11 ± 2.65 | 4.97 ± 1.31 | 5.67 ± 1.27 | 5.98 ± 0.74 |
| Citrate (mmol/L) | 0.86 ± 0.09 | 0.80 ± 0.21 | 6.89 ± 2.57ab | 0.89 ± 0.09c | 0.81 ± 0.25c |
| Potassium (mmol/L) | 7.35 ± 1.22 | 7.61 ± 1.29 | 6.92 ± 0.88 | 7.13 ± 1.19 | 7.29 ± 0.79 |
| Serum parameters | |||||
| Creatinine (mmol/L) | 25.33 ± 7.05 | 98.36 ± 11.17a | 46.41 ± 8.28ab | 29.53 ± 9.15bc | 27.39 ± 5.81bc |
| Urea (μmol/L) | 6.93 ± 1.55 | 24.96 ± 5.69a | 12.74 ± 3.81ab | 7.53 ± 2.58bc | 7.34 ± 2.93bc |
Values are expressed as the means ± standard error; ten animals in each group. (a) p <.05 versus group 1; (b) p <.05 versus group 2; (c) p <.05 versus group 3 and (d) p <.05 versus group 4.
Figure 2.Oxidative studies. Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error (n = 10). (a) p <.05 versus group 1; (b) p < .05 versus group 2; (c) p < .05 versus group 3 and (d) p < .05 versus group 4.
Figure 3.Histopathology (100×) of crystalline formation in the renal sections of rats with H&E staining for groups 1–5 (A–E) and scores for the crystal deposition and histopathological changes (F). Black arrows indicate renal crystals and white arrows indicate inflammatory cell invasion. Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error.(n = 10). a p <.05 versus group 1; b p <.05 versus group 2; c p < .05 versus group 3 and d p < .05 versus group 4.
Figure 4.Immunohistochemical staining revealing the expression and location of KIM-1(A) and P-JNK (B) (100×).
Figure 5.Representative immunoblots of the protein expression levels of KIM-1 and P-JNK. GAPDH from the samples was designated as the internal control. Values are expressed as the mean ± standard error (n = 3). (a) p < .05 versus group 1; (b) p < .05 versus group 2; (c) p < .05 versus group 3 and (d) p < .05 versus group 4.