4.5 Article

Rutin protects the neural damage induced by transient focal ischemia in rats

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1292, 期 -, 页码 123-135

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.07.026

关键词

Ischemia; Rutin; Neurobehavior; Oxidative stress; Brain infarct; Apoptosis

资金

  1. Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoeopathy (AYUSH), Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Free radical induced neural damage is implicated in cerebral ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury and antioxidants are reported to have neuroprotective activity. The present study was designed to assess the neuroprotective role of rutin (Vitamin P), and mechanism of action. The middle cerebral artery (MCA) of an adult male Wistar rat was occluded for 2 h and reperfused for 22 h. The administration of rutin (25 mg/kg bwt., orally) once daily for 21 days before middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO) showed marked reduction in infarct size, reduced the neurological deficits in terms of behaviors, suppressed neuronal loss and diminished the p53 expression in MCAO rats. A significantly depleted activity of antioxidant enzymes, glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione reductase (GR), catalase (CAT) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) and content of glutathione (GSH) in MCAO group were protected significantly in MCAO group pretreated with rutin. Conversely, the elevated level of thiobarbituric acid reactive species (TBARS), H2O2 and protein carbonyl (PC) in MCAO group was attenuated significantly in rutin-pretreated group when compared with MCAO group. These results indicate that rutin attenuates ischemic neural apoptosis by reducing the expression of p53, preventing morphological changes and increasing endogenous antioxidant enzymatic activities. Thus, rutin treatment may represent a novel approach in lowering the risk or improving the function of ischemia-reperfusion brain injury-related disorders. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.5
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