4.7 Article

Effects of total glucosides of paeony on oxidative stress in the kidney from diabetic rats

期刊

PHYTOMEDICINE
卷 17, 期 3-4, 页码 254-260

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH, URBAN & FISCHER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1016/j.phymed.2009.07.005

关键词

Diabetic nephropathy; Total glucosides of paeony; Paeonia lactiflora; Oxidative stress; Nitrotyrosine; NF-kappa B; Mitogen activated protein kinase

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province [070413100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TGP, extracted from the traditional Chinese herb root of Paeonia lactiflora pall, has been shown to have therapeutic effect in experimental diabetic nephropathy. However, its mechanism is not fully understood. In this study, the effects of TGP on oxidative stress were investigated in the kidney of diabetic rats induced by streptozotocin. TGP (50,100, 200 mg/kg) was orally administered once a day for 8 weeks. TGP treatment in all three doses significantly lowered 24 h urinary albumin excretion rate in diabetic rats and attenuated glomerular volume. TGP treatment with 100 and 200 mg/kg significantly reduced indices for tubulointerstitial injury in diabetic rats. The level of MDA was significantly increased in the kidney of diabetic rats and attenuated by TGP treatment at the dose of 200 mg/kg. TGP treatment in a dose-dependent manner decreased the level of 3-NT protein of the kidney which increased under diabetes. T-AOC was significantly reduced in diabetic rat kidney and remarkably increased by TGP treatment at the dose of 100 and 200 mg/kg. Activity of antioxidant enzyme such as SOD. CAT was markedly elevated by TGP treatment with 200 mg/kg. Western blot analysis showed that p-p38 MAPK and NF-kappa B p65 protein expression increased in diabetic rat kidney, which were significantly decreased by TGP treatment. It seems likely that oxidative stress is increased in the diabetic rat kidneys, while TGP can prevent diabetes-associated renal damage against oxidative stress. (C) 2009 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

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