| Literature DB >> 35749044 |
Susan M Britza1, Rachael Farrington1, Ian F Musgrave1, Craig Aboltins2, Roger W Byard3,4.
Abstract
Unexpected hepatic failure with liver necrosis is sometimes encountered during a forensic autopsy. Determining the etiology may sometimes be difficult, although increasingly herbal medicines are being implicated. To determine whether such effects might also be caused by foodstuffs, the following in vitro study was undertaken. Four formulations of traditional herbal soup advertised as bak kut teh were prepared and added to cultures of liver carcinoma cells (HepG2). Cell viability was assessed using an MTT colorimetric assay at 48 h demonstrating that all formulations had significant toxicity prior to dilution (p < 0.05). Formulation #1 showed 21% cell death (p = 0.023), Formulation #2 30% (p = 0.009), and Formulation #3 41% (p < 0.0001). Formulations #1-3 showed no significant toxicity once diluted (p > 0.05). Formulation 4 showed approximately 83% cell death before dilution (p < 0.0001) and persistent toxicity even with dilutions at 1:10 (15% ± 3.7, p = 0.023) and 1:1000 (14% ± 3.8, p = 0.024). This study has shown that herbal foodstuffs such as bak kut teh may be responsible for variable degrees of in vitro hepatotoxicity, thus extending the range of herbal products that may be potentially injurious to the liver. If unexpected liver damage is encountered at autopsy, information on possible recent ingestion of herbal food preparations should be sought, as routine toxicology screening will not identify the active components. Liver damage may therefore be caused not only by herbal medicines but possibly by herbal products contained in food.Entities:
Keywords: Bak kut the; Hepatotoxicity; Herbal soup; Idiosyncratic response; In vitro culture
Year: 2022 PMID: 35749044 PMCID: PMC9226283 DOI: 10.1007/s12024-022-00490-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Forensic Sci Med Pathol ISSN: 1547-769X Impact factor: 2.456
Fig. 1The effect of four different bak kut teh formulations on HepG2 cells after 48 h of exposure. A Formulation #1 showed significant toxicity before dilution (p = 0.023), but demonstrated no significant toxicity once diluted (p > 0.05). B Formulation #2 demonstrated significant toxicity with no dilution factor (p = 0.009), but none once diluted (p > 0.05). C Bak kut teh Formulation #3 showed similar toxicity when undiluted (p < 0.0001) but was not found to be toxic with dilution (p > 0.05). D Formulation #4 was shown to be significantly toxic undiluted (p < 0.0001) and in dilutions with a factor of 1:10 (p = 0.023) and 1:1000 (p = 0.024). Values mean ± SEM (n = 3). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ****p < 0.0001. One-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s. Where error bars are not shown, they are smaller than the symbol