论文部分内容阅读
背景:木芙蓉叶是我国著名伤科魏指薪教授的在临床应用于消非特异性炎症的非常有效的药物,已经有近60年历史,为了阐明该药的作用机制,以缺血再灌注损伤的模型进行研究,来说明其抗炎的作用机制。目的:观察木芙蓉叶有效组分(MFR)对大鼠肾缺血再灌注损伤中的保护作用,探讨MFR的抗炎作用机制。设计:以实验动物为研究对象的随机对照实验研究。单位:一所市级伤骨科研究所。材料:实验于2002-06/2003-06在国家中医药管理局重点实验室(上海市伤骨科研究所内实施完成),选取雄性Wistar大鼠55只。方法:采用大鼠肾缺血再灌注模型,木芙蓉叶有效组分灌胃,检测血清尿素氮、肌酐,并检测白细胞介素-1(IL-1)的含量。主要观察指标:①血尿素氮及肌酐的变化。②MFR对血清IL-1含量的影响。结果:经MFR治疗后,能明显改善大鼠缺血再灌注后肾功能的变化。假手术组大鼠血清尿素氮为(6.72±1.30)mmol/L,血清肌酐为(38.40±6.23)μmol/L。缺血1h并再灌注24h后,对照组大鼠尿素氮为(60.72±4.64)mmol/L,而MFR治疗组尿素氮为(47.34±8.32)mmol/L,两组之间的差异有显著性意义(t=2.562,P<0.05);治疗组和对照组的血清肌酐分别为(347.95±95)μmol/L和(518.20±41.15)μmol/L,两者之间差异具有显著性意义(t=3.69,P<0.01)。在IL-1的作用方面:肾?
Background: Hibiscus mutabilis leaves is a very effective medicine for the elimination of non-specific inflammation in clinical practice. It has a history of nearly 60 years. In order to elucidate the mechanism of action of the drug, the ischemia-reperfusion injury The model was studied to illustrate its anti-inflammatory mechanism of action. Objective: To observe the protective effect of the effective component (MFR) of Hibiscus mutabilis on renal ischemia-reperfusion injury in rats, and to explore the anti-inflammatory mechanism of MFR. Design: A randomized, controlled experimental study of experimental animals. Unit: A municipal orthopedics institute. MATERIALS: The experiment was performed at the Key Laboratory of the State Administration of Traditional Chinese Medicine (Shanghai Institute of Orthopedics) from June 2002 to October 2003. A total of 55 male Wistar rats were selected. METHODS: Rat renal ischemia-reperfusion model was used. The effective components of Hibiscus mutabilis were intragastrically administered. Serum urea nitrogen and creatinine levels were measured and interleukin-1 (IL-1) levels were measured. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 1 Changes in blood urea nitrogen and creatinine. The effect of 2MFR on serum IL-1 levels. RESULTS: After MFR treatment, the changes of renal function after ischemia and reperfusion in rats were significantly improved. Serum urea nitrogen in the sham group was (6.72±1.30) mmol/L, and serum creatinine was (38.40±6.23) μmol/L. After ischemia for 1h and reperfusion for 24h, the urea nitrogen of the control group was (60.72±4.64) mmol/L, while that of the MFR group was (47.34±8.32) mmol/L. There was a significant difference between the two groups. Significance (t=2.562, P<0.05); serum creatinine in the treatment and control groups were (347.95±95) μmol/L and (518.20±41.15) μmol/L, respectively, and there was a significant difference between the two groups (t = 3.69, P < 0.01). In the role of IL-1: kidney?