4.7 Article

Antinociceptive pharmacological profile of Dysphania graveolens in mouse

期刊

BIOMEDICINE & PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 89, 期 -, 页码 933-938

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.02.096

关键词

Dysphania graveolens; Antinociception; Epazote; Chrysin; Flavonoids

资金

  1. Instituto Politecnico Nacional (ESM-IPN) [SIP-20170861]
  2. Departamento de Farmacia, Facultad de Quimica, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work evaluates the potential antinociceptive activity of Dysphania graveolens, traditional medicinal plant used in Mexico to treat stomach pain. A CH2Cl2-MeOH extract, infusion and essential oil from aerial parts of Dysphania graveolens were evaluated in hot plate and writhing tests in mice. The metabolites pinostrobin, pinocembrin and chrysin were isolated from the Dysphania graveolens infusion; next, they were evaluated in both nociceptive tests. To confirm the antinociceptive activity and explore the possible participation of opioid, GABA and serotonin receptors in the pharmacological mechanism, a formalin test was used. Oral administration of Dysphania graveolens CH2Cl2-MeOH extract, infusion and essential oil (31-316 mg/kg) produced an antinociceptive response to thermic and chemical algesic stimuli. Essential oil was the most active partition of this plant. In addition, the secondary metabolites pinostrobin, pinocembrin and chrysin possess a significant antinociceptive effect. This response was confirmed by the formalin test for the CH2Cl2-MeOH extract of Dysphania graveolens and chrysin. In both cases, the antinociceptive activity was reverted in the presence of naltrexone, flumazenil and bicuculline antagonists. The 5-HT2A/2C receptors did not participate in the antinociceptive response of this plant. The overall information tends to support the efficacy of Dysphania graveolens as an analgesic and its cultural use in abdominal pain. (c) 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. 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