SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Medical Science and Discovery / 2015 / Cilt: 2 Sayı: 4

Effect of Acetaminofen Versus Lornoxicam Admistration on Oxidative Stress in Rat Hepatic and Renal Tissues

Effect of acetaminofen versus lornoxicam administration on oxidative stress in rat hepatic and renal tissues

Mustafa ATAC
Saban SEZEN
Mustafa BİLGE
Berrin ISİK
Mustafa ARSLAN
Faruk COMU
Mustafa KAVUTCU
Dervis YİLMAZ
Pages
244–53
Publication Date
2015-04-07
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Renal injury in group L more than the Group AP.Conclusion: The results suggest that hepatotoxic effects of lornoxicam more than the AP while no remarkable difference nephrotoxicity.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background and aim: The aim of study was to assess the oxidative status in rat hepatic and renal tissues after intraperitoneal administration of acetaminophen (AP) versus lornoxicam (L).Materials and Methods: For this purpose 18 Wistar Albino rats were randomly divided into 3 groups; each group consists of 6 rats.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Group AP received AP (100 mg kg-1) and Group L received L (1.3 mg kg-1) intraperitoneally.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Renal injury in group L more than the Group AP.Conclusion: The results suggest that hepatotoxic effects of lornoxicam more than the AP while no remarkable difference nephrotoxicity.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Oxidative stress · Acetaminophen · Lornoxicam

Abstract

Background and aim: The aim of study was to assess the oxidative status in rat hepatic and renal tissues after intraperitoneal administration of acetaminophen (AP) versus lornoxicam (L).Materials and Methods: For this purpose 18 Wistar Albino rats were randomly divided into 3 groups; each group consists of 6 rats. Group Control (Group C) remain untreated, comprises healthy rats. Group AP received AP (100 mg kg-1) and Group L received L (1.3 mg kg-1) intraperitoneally. Oxidative status was evaluated by MDA, SOD, GST and CAT in hepatic and renal tissues. Furthermore histopathalogical evaluation was performed in both tissues.Results: The lornoxicam received rats (Group L) showed significantly increased level of MDA and GST [(p=0.015), (p=0.048) respectively],decreased level of SOD (p=0.02)in liver tissue. Renal tissue MDA, SOD and GST activity and CAT levels were similar in groups [(p=0.168), (p=0.270), (p=0.686) respectively]. Histopathalogically Group AP and Group L more damaged than in Group C. Hepatic injury was moderate level in two groups. Minimal injury was observed in group AP. Renal injury in group L more than the Group AP.Conclusion: The results suggest that hepatotoxic effects of lornoxicam more than the AP while no remarkable difference nephrotoxicity.

🔖

Cite This Article

ATAC, M., SEZEN, S., BİLGE, M., ISİK, B., ARSLAN, M., COMU, F., KAVUTCU, M., YİLMAZ, D. (2015). Effect of Acetaminofen Versus Lornoxicam Admistration on Oxidative Stress in Rat Hepatic and Renal Tissues. Medical Science and Discovery, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 4, 244–53. https://ajindex.com/articles/1002574

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Litovitz TL, Klein-Schwartz W, Rodgers GC Jr, et al. 2001 annual report of the American Association of Poison Control Centers Toxic Exposure Surveillance System. Am J Emerg Med 2002; 20: 391-452.
  2. Waters E, Wang JH, Redmond HP, et al. Role of taurine in preventing acetaminophen-induced hepatic injury in the rat. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2001; 280: 1274-1279.
  3. Noriega GO, Ossola JO, Tomaro ML, Batlle AM. Effect of acetaminophen on heme metabolism in rat liver. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 2000; 32: 983-991.
  4. Gambaro G, Perazella MA. Adverse renal effects of antiinflammatory agents: evaluation of selective and nonselective cyclooxygenase inhibitors. J Int Med 2003; 253: 643-52.
  5. Arslan M, Comu FM, Isik B, Atac MS, Yilmaz D. The evaluation of effects of lornoxicam on blood flow and erythrocythe deformability in comparison with i.v. paracetamol in rats. Bratisl Med J 2012; 113: 211-213.
  6. Andrzej P, Monika W Agniescka S Wejeiech G, Patrycja LK, Jerzy M. NSAID acute liver failure-A case Report. J. Chromatogr. B. Analyte. technol. Biomed. cif. sci, 2011; 879:573-578.
  7. Turner P, Johnston A. Clinical pharmacokinetic studies withlornoxicam. Postgrad. Med. J. 1990; 66: 28–9.
  8. Bianchi M, Panerai AE. Effects of lornoxicam, piroxicam, andmeloxicam in a model of thermal hind paw hyperalgesia induced by formalininjection in rat tail. Pharmacol Res 2002; 45: 101–105.
  9. Pohlmeyer-Esch G, Mehdi N, Clarke D, Radhofer-Welte S.Evaluation of chronic oral toxicity and carcinogenic potential of lornoxicamin rats. Food Chem. Toxicol. 1997;35: 909–922.
  10. Sen S, Doger FK, Sen S, Aydin ON, Karul A, Dost T. The protective effect of nitroglycerin on gastrointestinal and renal side effects of lornoxicam in rats. Eur J Pharmacol 2006; 541: 191-7.
  11. Abdel-Wahhab MA, Nada SA, Arbid MS. Ochratoxicosis: Prevention of developmental toxicity by L-methionine in rats m. Journal of applied toxicology. J Appl Toxicol 1999; 19: 7-12.
  12. Van Ye TM, Roza AM, Pieper GM, Henderson J Jr, Johnson JP, Adams MB. Inhibition of intestinal lipid peroxidation does not minimize morphological damage. J Surg Res 1993; 55:553-558.
  13. Durak I, Canbolat O, Kavutcu M, Öztürk HS, Yurtarslanı Z. Activities of total, cytoplasmic and mihochondrial superoxide dismutase enzymes in sera and pleural fluids from patient with lung cancer. J Clin Lab Anal 1996; 10: 17-20. Aebi H. Catalase. In: H.U.Bergmeyer (Ed): Methods of Enzymatic Analysis, Academic Press, New York and London, 1974; pp.673-677.
  14. Habig WH, Pabst MJ, Jakoby WB. Glutathi