| Literature DB >> 34725636 |
Farkhanda Arshad1, Huma Umbreen2, Iqra Aslam3, Arruje Hameed1, Kiran Aftab4, Wahidah H Al-Qahtani5, Nighat Aslam6, Razia Noreen1.
Abstract
Obesity is a chronic metabolic and noncommunicable disease that affects 50% of world population. Reactive oxygen species and oxidative stress are interconnected with the obesity and several metabolic disorders, gaining the attention of scientific community to combat this problem naturally. Among various fruits, mango as a yellow fruit is rich in polyphenols, carotenoids, terpenes, and flavonoids that act as antioxidants to protect against free radicals produced in the body. The present study was performed to explore in vivo antioxidant potential of mango peels against dyslipidemia and oxidative stress in overweight subjects. The female volunteers (n = 31) between 25 and 45 years of age having a body mass index (BMI) of 25.0-29.9 (overweight) were included in this study, while participants with complications as diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular, and liver diseases were excluded. The treatment group consumed 1 g mango peel powder for 84 days. The subjects were analyzed for biochemical analysis, antioxidant status, and anthropometric measurements at baseline and end of the study period. Further, at the end of study, the safety evaluation tests were also performed. The results showed that upon consumption of mango peel powder, low-density lipoproteins (LDL), cholesterol, triglyceride, urea, and creatinine levels were decreased and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) level was increased (P ≤ 0.05), while thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) showed increased antioxidant status (P ≤ 0.05) which suggests that mango peels have a strong management potential against oxidative stress and dyslipidemia in obese subjects.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34725636 PMCID: PMC8557052 DOI: 10.1155/2021/3094571
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
HPLC profile of mango peel extract.
| Compounds | Retention time (Rt) | Amount (ppm) | Area (mv·S) | Area (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kaempherol | 2.35 ± 0.02g | 187.7 ± 0.04b | 2813.37 ± 3.4d | 93.5 ± 1.2a |
| Quercetin | 3.07 ± 0.01f | 11.87 ± 0.01f | 224.82 ± 1.2g | 0.2 ± 0.2g |
| Gallic acid | 4.83 ± 0.01e | 95.90 ± 0.02c | 26641.69 ± 3.5b | 22.2 ± 0.1c |
| Caffeic acid | 12.68 ± 0.03d | 247.39 ± 0.59a | 53782.26 ± 3.3a | 44.8 ± 3.5b |
| Chlorogenic acid | 15.30 ± 0.04a | 95.52 ± 0.04c | 12250.82 ± 2.7c | 10.2 ± 0.09d |
| Vitamin C | 23.56 ± 0.1b | 49.52 ± 0.04d | 2476.19 ± 1.3e | 2.1 ± 0.03e |
| Sinapic acid | 26.61 ± 0.7a | 14.76 ± 0.04e | 1136.40 ± 1.4f | 0.9 ± 0.01f |
a–gDifferent letters in columns show a significant difference at P ≤ 0.05.
Figure 1HPLC chromatogram of phenolic compounds of the mango peel extract. Peak identification of mango peel extract: 2, kaempherol; 3, quercetin; 6, gallic acid; 8, caffeic acid; 9, chlorogenic acid; 11, vitamin C; and 12, sinapicacid.
Average baseline anthropometric measurement of volunteers.
| Parameters | Groups | Probability values∗ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control ( | Treatment ( | ||
| Age (years) | 33.7 ± 1.31 | 34.1 ± 0.92 | 0.15 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 29.2 ± 0.46 | 29.0 ± 0.46 | 0.12 |
Data is presented as the means ± SE of control and treatment group. ∗Probability values (P ≤0.05) show significant differences between the groups.
Figure 2Effect of treatment days on the BMI value of obese subjects in the control and MPP-treated groups.
Blood biochemistry of the control and treatment groups of obese subjects.
| Parameters | Groups | Probability values∗ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control ( | Treatment ( | ||
| Complete blood count (g/dL) | |||
| Hemoglobin | 12.44 ± 0.94 | 12.38 ± 0.84 | 0.96 |
| Eosinophils | 0.14 ± 0.024 | 0.14 ± 0.024 | 1 |
| ESR | 17.80 ± 0.80 | 16.60 ± 0.67 | 0.28 |
| Lymphocytes | 36.60 ± 0.40b | 39.20 ± 0.91a | 0.03 |
| Monocytes | 0.24 ± 0.024 | 0.24 ± 0.024 | 1 |
| Polymorphs | 60 ± 0.04 | 54.60 ± 2.46 | 0.59 |
| TLC | 7720 ± 185.47 | 7660.0 ± 60.0 | 0.76 |
| Lipid profile (mg/dL) | |||
| Triglycerides | 146.80 ± 1.73a | 140.30 ± 2.48b | 0.02 |
| Total cholesterol | 188.90 ± 3.06a | 164.10 ± 3.35b | 0.01 |
| HDL | 46.10 ± 1.73b | 50.70 ± 1.35a | 0.05 |
| LDL | 134.90 ± 3.51a | 122.70 ± 2.55b | 0.01 |
| TBARS ( | 6.08 ± 0.07a | 5.66 ± 0.05b | 0.001 |
Data are presented as the means ± SEM of the control and treatment groups. ∗Probability values (P ≤ 0.05) show significant differences between the groups. a,bDifferent letters in rows show a significant difference at P ≤ 0.05. TC: total cholesterol; HDL: high-density lipoprotein; LDL: low-density lipoprotein; Hb: hemoglobin; ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate; TLC: total leukocyte count.
Figure 3Reduction in the TBARS (μmol/mL ±SEM) value with increase in treatment days.
Safety analysis for the control and treatment groups of obese subjects.
| Parameters | Groups | Probability values∗ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control ( | Treatment ( | ||
| Liver function test | |||
| Bilirubin direct (mg/dL) | 0.40 ± 0.05 | 0.41 ± 0.05 | 0.90 |
| Bilirubin indirect (mg/dL) | 0.23 ± 0.012b | 0.38 ± 0.05a | 0.03 |
| Bilirubin total (mg/dL) | 0.64 ± 0.048 | 0.48 ± 0.15 | 0.35 |
| ALP (U/L) | 244.0 ± 12.88a | 188.40 ± 0.40b | 0.002 |
| ALT (U/L) | 53.200 ± 3.30 | 44.00 ± 3.67 | 0.09 |
| AST (U/L) | 39.00 ± 2.19a | 30.40 ± 0.40b | 0.004 |
| Renal function test (mg/dL) | |||
| Blood urea | 39.60 ± 1.50a | 34.6 ± 0.74b | 0.02 |
| Creatinine | 0.80 ± 0.06a | 0.74 ± 0.05b | 0.02 |
∗Probability values P ≤ 0.05 show significant differences between the groups. Different letters (ab) in the column show significant difference at P ≤ 0.05. Data is presented as the means ± SEM of the control and treatment groups. ALP: Alkaline phosphatase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; AST: aspartate aminotransferase.