4.4 Article

Therapeutic efficacy of mebendazole and artemisinin in different phases of trichinellosis: a comparative experimental study

Journal

PARASITOLOGY
Volume 148, Issue 5, Pages 630-635

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0031182021000056

Keywords

Artemisinin; encysted larvae; mebendazole; mice; Trichinella spiralis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study showed that mebendazole was more effective in treating trichinellosis compared to artemisinin, especially when treatment was initiated during the enteral phase. Both drugs demonstrated anthelmintic activity against Trichinella spiralis infection in mice.
The present work aimed at studying the efficacy of mebendazole (MBZ) compared to artemisinin (ART) for the treatment of trichinellosis at various phases of infection. Seventy Swiss albino mice were orally infected by 300 Trichinella spiralis (T. spiralis) larvae. Mice were divided into infected untreated control group and infected groups treated with 50 mg kg(-1) MBZ and 300 mg kg(-1) ART for three and five consecutive days, respectively, at the enteral phase [2-4 days post infection (PI)], invasive phase (10-12 days PI) and encapsulated phase (28-30 days PI). All mice were sacrificed 35-42 days PI. MBZ and ART revealed a significant decrease in mean larval counts and increase of larval per cent reduction (LR %) when treatment was initiated during the enteral phase compared to the other phases. MBZ showed significantly higher LR % (99.7, 83.95 and 89.65%) than ART (80.58, 67.0 and 79.2%) when administered at the three infection phases. Histopathological study showed a decrease in the number of encysted larvae, their surrounding cellular infiltrates and increased regenerative muscles in all treated mice. In conclusion, ART possesses a substantial anthelmintic activity against T. spiralis infection in mice both at the enteral and encapsulated phases, yet, significantly lower than MBZ.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available