| Literature DB >> 36117501 |
K P Swathi1, Saravanan Jayaram2, Deepa Sugumar2, Emdormi Rymbai2.
Abstract
Objective: Clitoria ternatea is a well-known bioactive plant used to treat several inflammatory ailments in Ayurvedic system of medicine in India. The present investigation aimed to determine the anti-inflammatory and anti-arthritic activity of ethanolic extract of Clitoria ternatea roots (EECT) in animal models.Entities:
Keywords: Clitoria ternatea Linn.; antioxidants; inflammation; rheumatoid arthritis
Year: 2020 PMID: 36117501 PMCID: PMC9476680 DOI: 10.1016/j.chmed.2020.11.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chin Herb Med ISSN: 1674-6384
Effect of EECT on carrageenan-induced paw oedema in rats (mean ± SEM, n = 6).
| Treatments | Mean edema volume (mL) and inhibition (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 h | 2 h | 3 h | 4 h | 5 h | |
| Carrageenan | 0.15 ± 0.003 | 0.17 ± 0.007 | 0.42 ± 0.02 | 0.46 ± 0.01 | 0.17 ± 0.013 |
| Diclofenac (20 mg/kg) | 0.11 ± 0.007** | 0.09 ± 0.003*** | 0.09 ± 0.02*** | 0.03 ± 0.008*** | 0.01 ± 0.002*** |
| EECT (200 mg/kg) | 0.14 ± 0.009 ns | 0.12 ± 0.003*** | 0.10 ± 0.009*** | 0.06 ± 0.009*** | 0.03 ± 0.009*** |
| EECT (400 mg/kg) | 0.12 ± 0.010 ns | 0.10 ± 0.009*** | 0.09 ± 0.0*** | 0.05 ± 0.009*** | 0.02 ± 0.004*** |
Statistical analysis was done by one-way analysis of variation (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett’s test. ***P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, *P < 0.05 and ns- non significant. Standard and test were compared with carrageenan group.
Effect of EECT on histamine-induced rat paw oedema in rats (mean ± SEM, n = 6).
| Groups | Treatments and doses | Mean edema volume (mL) and inhibition (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 90 min | 180 min | ||
| I | Histamine 1% (0.1 mL) | 0.24 ± 0.018 | 0.43 ± 0.018 |
| II | Diclofenac (20 mg/kg) | 0.07 ± 0.009*** | 0.05 ± 0.009*** |
| III | EECT (200 mg/kg) | 0.14 ± 0.003** | 0.13 ± 0.003*** |
| IV | EECT (400 mg/kg) | 0.11 ± 0.018*** | 0.08 ± 0.012*** |
Statistical analysis was done by one-way analysis of variation (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett’s test. ***P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, *P < 0.05 and ns- non significant. Standard and test were compared with histamine group.
Effect of EECT on CFA induced arthritis paw diameter (mean ± SEM, n = 6).
| Groups | Increase in paw diameter / mm | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 | Day 14 | Day 21 | |
| Normal | 0.07 ± 0.009 | 0.093 ± 0.4 | 0.09 ± 0.0 | 0.12 ± 0.0 | 0.13 ± 0.0 |
| Arthritic control | 2.48 ± 0.208*** | 4.09 ± 0.3*** | 4.9 ± 0.4*** | 5.6 ± 0.2*** | 6.63 ± 0.4*** |
| CFA + Diclofenac (10 mg/kg) | 2.03 ± 0.2 ns | 3.10 ± 0.2 ns | 3.53 ± 0.5 ns | 2.86 ± 0.3*** | 2.91 ± 0.0*** |
| CFA + EECT (200 mg/kg) | 2.2 ± 0.3 ns | 3.800 ± 0.3 ns | 4.03 ± 0.6 ns | 3.8 ± 0.3* | 4.60 ± 0.4*** |
| CFA + EECT (400 mg/kg) | 2.43 ± 0.3 ns | 3.60 ± 0.4 ns | 3.93 ± 0.5 ns | 3.16 ± 0.4*** | 3.30 ± 0.2*** |
Statistical analysis was done by one-way analysis of variation (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 and ns- non significant. Arthritic control was compared with normal and the treated groups were compared with arthritic control.
Effect of EECT on arthritic score (mean ± SEM, n = 6).
| Groups | Arthritic scores | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day 3 | Day 5 | Day 7 | Day 9 | Day 11 | Day 13 | Day 15 | Day 17 | Day 19 | Day 21 | |
| Control | 1.66 ± 0.210 | 2.33 ± 0.2 | 3.16 ± 0.6 | 4.83 ± 0.9 | 5 ± 0.6 | 5 ± 0.6 | 5.17 ± 0.9 | 5.66 ± 0.8 | 6 ± 0.894 | 6 ± 0.8 |
| CFA + Diclofenac (10 mg/kg) | 0.93 ± 0.166** | 1 ± 0.00** | 1.33 ± 0.3* | 2.13 ± 0.2* | 2.13 ± 0.2* | 2.33 ± 0.2* | 3.66 ± 0.2 ns | 3.16 ± 0.6 ns | 3.16 ± 0.6* | 3 ± 0.0** |
| CFA + EECT (200 mg/kg) | 1.66 ± 0.210 ns | 1.83 ± 0.1 ns | 2.6 ± 0.5 ns | 3.16 ± 0.6 ns | 4.5 ± 1.0 ns | 4.66 ± 1.0 ns | 5.15 ± 0.9 ns | 5 ± 1.6 ns | 4.83 ± 0.9 ns | 5 ± 1.0 ns |
| CFA + EECT (400 mg/kg) | 1 ± 0.0* | 1.16 ± 0.3* | 1.5 ± 0.3 ns | 2 ± 0.3** | 2.13 ± 0.3* | 2.6 ± 0.5 ns | 3.5 ± 0.2 ns | 4.5 ± 1.0 ns | 4.3 ± 0.3 ns | 3.5 ± 0.2* |
Statistical analysis was done by one-way analysis of variation (ANOVA) followed by Dunnett’s test. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 and ns- non significant. Standard and test were compared with control.
Effect of EECT on enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant levels in rat paw tissue (mean ± SEM, n = 6).
| Groups | Antioxidant enzymes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOD (Unit/mg protein) | CAT (μmol of H2O2 consumed/ mg protein) | GSH (Glutathione μg/mg) | LPO (nmol of MDA/mg protein) | |
| Normal | 2.1 ± 0.3044 | 19.57 ± 1.130 | 12.98 ± 0.722 | 9 ± 0.577 |
| Arthritic control | 0.89 ± 0.082*** | 13.55 ± 0.977*** | 7.70 ± 0.570*** | 18.8 ± 0.621*** |
| CFA + Diclofenac | 1.79 ± 0.178** | 18.10 ± 0.822** | 12.17 ± 0.703*** | 10.17 ± 0.703*** |
| CFA + EECT 200 mg/kg | 1.26 ± 0.111 ns | 17.17 ± 0.600* | 10.73 ± 0.714* | 14.33 ± 0.988** |
| CFA + EECT 400 mg/kg | 1.61 ± 0.054* | 17.9 ± 0.616** | 11.77 ± 0.744** | 12.83 ± 0.945*** |
Statistical analysis was done by one-way analysis of variation (ANOVA) followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 and ns- non significant. Arthritic control was compared with normal and the treated groups were compared with arthritic control.
Fig. 1Histopathology of Joints. Normal control group shows normal synovial lining and no signs of inflammation. The arthritic control shows a significant disruption of synovial lining, bone necrosis, dense infiltration of lymphocytes and plasma cells in subsynovial stroma. The synovial lining is normal with no signs of inflammation and bone necrosis in the group treated with diclofenac. A moderate degree of inflammation and infiltration of lymphocytes were observed in the group treated with EECT 200 mg/kg. A normal synovial lining, subsynovial stroma and no evidence of inflammatory cells and bone necrosis was observed in the group treated with EECT 400 mg/kg.
Fig. 2Radiological analysis of joints. Normal group (A), control group (B), diclofenac (10 mg/kg) group (C), test (200 mg/kg) group (D), test (400 mg/kg) group (E). An increase in bone erosion and joint space reduction and deformation of joints was observed in the control group. The groups treated with diclofenac, 200 and 400 mg/kg of test substance showed a marked inhibition of bone erosion and deformation of joints.