4.7 Review

Herbal Remedies and Their Possible Effect on the GABAergic System and Sleep

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu13020530

关键词

gamma-aminobutyric acid; GABA receptors; sleep; insomnia; herbal medicine

资金

  1. Sanofi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sleep is crucial for physical and emotional wellbeing, but insomnia is a prevalent issue. The interest in using herbal medicines for treating or preventing insomnia has grown. Herbal extracts have been shown to improve sleep quality, potentially through interactions with GABA receptors in the brain.
Sleep is an essential component of physical and emotional well-being, and lack, or disruption, of sleep due to insomnia is a highly prevalent problem. The interest in complementary and alternative medicines for treating or preventing insomnia has increased recently. Centuries-old herbal treatments, popular for their safety and effectiveness, include valerian, passionflower, lemon balm, lavender, and Californian poppy. These herbal medicines have been shown to reduce sleep latency and increase subjective and objective measures of sleep quality. Research into their molecular components revealed that their sedative and sleep-promoting properties rely on interactions with various neurotransmitter systems in the brain. Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is an inhibitory neurotransmitter that plays a major role in controlling different vigilance states. GABA receptors are the targets of many pharmacological treatments for insomnia, such as benzodiazepines. Here, we perform a systematic analysis of studies assessing the mechanisms of action of various herbal medicines on different subtypes of GABA receptors in the context of sleep control. Currently available evidence suggests that herbal extracts may exert some of their hypnotic and anxiolytic activity through interacting with GABA receptors and modulating GABAergic signaling in the brain, but their mechanism of action in the treatment of insomnia is not completely understood.

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