4.7 Article

Comparison of Antioxidant Effects of Honey, Glibenclamide, Metformin, and Their Combinations in the Kidneys of Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Rats

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 829-843

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms12010829

关键词

diabetes mellitus; streptozotocin; oxidative stress; antioxidant enzymes; kidney; tualang honey; metformin; glibenclamide

资金

  1. Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) [1001/PPSP/81202020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hyperglycemia-induced increase in oxidative stress is implicated in diabetic complications. This study investigated the effect of metformin and/or glibenclamide in combination with honey on antioxidant enzymes and oxidative stress markers in the kidneys of streptozotocin (60 mg/kg; intraperitoneal)-induced diabetic rats. Diabetic rats were randomized into eight groups of five to seven rats and received distilled water (0.5 mL); honey (1.0 g/kg); metformin (100 mg/kg); metformin (100 mg/kg) and honey (1.0 g/kg); glibenclamide (0.6 mg/kg); glibenclamide (0.6 mg/kg) and honey (1.0 g/kg); metformin (100 mg/kg) and glibenclamide (0.6 mg/kg); or metformin (100 mg/kg), glibenclamide (0.6 mg/kg) and honey (1.0 g/kg) orally once daily for four weeks. Malondialdehyde (MDA) levels, glutathione peroxidase (GPx) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities were significantly elevated while catalase (CAT) activity, total antioxidant status (TAS), reduced glutathione (GSH), and GSH:oxidized glutathione (GSSG) ratio was significantly reduced in the diabetic kidneys. CAT, glutathione reductase (GR), TAS, and GSH remained significantly reduced in the diabetic rats treated with metformin and/or glibenclamide. In contrast, metformin or glibenclamide combined with honey significantly increased CAT, GR, TAS, and GSH. These results suggest that combination of honey with metformin or glibenclamide might offer additional antioxidant effect to these drugs. This might reduce oxidative stress-mediated damage in diabetic kidneys.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据