{"id":29419,"date":"2019-12-28T11:38:33","date_gmt":"2019-12-28T11:38:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/?p=29419"},"modified":"2021-08-27T08:13:06","modified_gmt":"2021-08-27T08:13:06","slug":"assessment-of-hepatoprotective-activity-of-rajata-bhasma-in-ccl%c2%ac4-induced-hepatotoxicity-rats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/vol12no4\/assessment-of-hepatoprotective-activity-of-rajata-bhasma-in-ccl%c2%ac4-induced-hepatotoxicity-rats\/","title":{"rendered":"Assessment of Hepatoprotective Activity of Rajata Bhasma in CCl\u00ac4 Induced Hepatotoxicity Rats"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

Liver is the biggest organ in the vertebrate body and the site for exceptional digestion. Liver toxicity stay one of the genuine medical issues and are mostly brought about by toxic chemicals. In spite of the colossal advances made in allopathic prescription, no compelling hepatoprotective drug is accessible1,2<\/sup>. The use of natural remedies for the treatment of liver diseases has a long history, starting with the Ayurvedic treatment, and extending to the Chinese, European and other systems of traditional medicines. The 21st<\/sup> century has seen a change in outlook towards remedial assessment of Ayurvedic products in liver disease models via cautiously synergizing the qualities of the traditional systems of medicine with that of the modern concept of evidence-based medicinal evaluation, standardization and randomized placebo controlled clinical trials to support clinical efficacy3<\/sup>. A large number of Ayurvedic formulations have been claimed to have hepatoprotective activity.<\/p>\n

Ayurveda, a traditional Indian System of Medicine, is accepted to in presence from days of yore. There are confirmations for the utilization of medications got from minerals, vegetable and animal products. It is accepted, that the teachings have been gotten from Lord Dhanvantari, which has taken its shape during the Vedic time and the substance referenced in Ayurvedic exemplary messages specifically Charaka Samhita and Susrutha Samhita. Charaka Samhita features the analysis of sickness, though Susrutha Samhita manages surgeries and careful devices. Aside from treating unpleasant maladies, Ayurvedic practices fit the prosperity of a person through Yoga practices and meditation4<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

The bhasmas derived using several metals are known for their numerous therapeutic uses against dreadful diseases. For instance, Swarna bhasma (Gold based bhasma) has been indicated for many degenerative diseases. Tamara bhasma (Copper based bhasma) has been used to treat leucoderma, cardiac problems, liver and stomach related disorders. Rajata Bhasma (Silver based bhasma) has known for effect against diabetes, fever, anaemia and psychological disorders. Vanga bhasma (Tin based bhasma) is prescribed to patients suffering from diseases like diabetes mellitus, asthma, anaemia and gastric ulcers5<\/sup>. The present study was intended to evaluate hepatoprotective activity of two different samples acquired from Rajata Bhasma.<\/p>\n

Material and Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n

Preparation of Rajata Bhasma <\/strong><\/p>\n

The Rajata Bhasma was prepared in two different form, RB1 prepared by 9 puta while RB2 prepared by 17 puta. The detailed procedure is given below6<\/sup>:<\/p>\n

Rajat foil cut into small pieces and amalgam was formed with parade in mortar<\/p>\n

Purified gandhaka was added to amalgam and triturated till formation of proper Kajjali<\/p>\n

Followed by impreganation with kumara swarasa to preparation of Chakrikas (Pellets)<\/p>\n

Dried chakrikas were placed in sharvana and laghu puta was given<\/p>\n

After first puta, Rajata was in completely powder form<\/p>\n

In subsequent two putas, half amount of kajjali was added, triturated with kumara swarasa and puta was given<\/p>\n

From 4-9 puta, half part of gandhaka was added in place of kajjali (Considered as a RB1)<\/p>\n

Remaining puta were followed without addition of Kajjali or Gandhaka<\/p>\n

17 puta were given to obtain Rajat Bhasma that passing all classical parameter (Considered as a RB2)<\/p>\n

Hepatoprotective activity of RB1 and RB2<\/strong><\/p>\n

Assessment of hepatoprotective activity was carried out on wistar albino rats. The animals were segregated into SIX groups of six animals each. Group I served as normal control receiving 5% CMC (10ml\/kg). All other groups received CCl4<\/sub> (1ml \/kg i.p.) with equal volume of olive oil (50% v\/v) for two successive days. Group II animals were maintained as CCl4<\/sub> group, while Group III rats were administered RB1 (50 mg\/kg body weight) orally, Group IV rats were administered RB1 (100 mg\/kg body weight) orally, Group V rats were administered RB2 (50 mg\/kg body weight) orally and Group VI rats were administered RB2 (100 mg\/kg body weight) orally for seven days. After the drug treatment all the animals were sacrificed by cervical dislocation. Blood was collected from the carotid artery and was allowed to clot for 45 min at room temperature; serum was separated by centrifugation at 2500 rpm for 15 min, used for the estimation of various biochemical parameters.<\/p>\n

Biochemical estimation<\/strong><\/p>\n

Biochemical parameters such as serum glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase (SGOT), serum glutamate pyruvate transaminase (SGPT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), acid phosphatase (ACP) and serum bilirubin were determined7,8<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Analysis of antioxidant enzymes of liver tissue<\/strong><\/p>\n

The antioxidant activities in the rat liver homogenate were assayed for superoxide dismutase (SOD), Catalase (CAT) and Glutathione (GSH) and activity lipid peroxidation (LPO)9-12<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Statistical analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n

The results are expressed as mean \u00b1 SD of six independent experiments. Statistical significance between the groups was evaluated by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Dunet\u2019s test. A P < 0.05 value was considered as statistically significant.<\/p>\n

Results and Discussions<\/strong><\/p>\n

Bhasma is sole of Ayurveda metal-based preparations made by following complex pharmaceutical processes incorporating herbs, converting them into a suitable form. They are preventive and complementary alternate medicine used in the Indian subcontinent since seventh century BC and widely recommended for treatment of a variety of chronic ailments. Conventional modern medicine is not always successful to control liver toxicity in all cases. Rajata Bhasma are safe to detoxify the liver toxicity.<\/p>\n

Hepatoprotective activity of RB<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hepatoprotective activity of RB was determined in CC14 <\/sub>induced hepatotoxicity rats. It was observed that the rats treated with CCl4<\/sub> significantly altered the biochemical parameters in serum compared to normal group of rats (Table 1). This indicates the severe damage of liver of rats.<\/p>\n

The rats treated with different doses of RB1 (50 mg\/kg and 100 mg\/kg) and RB2 (50 mg\/kg and 100 mg\/kg) leads to significantly reduced the CCl4<\/sub> induced alteration in SGOT, SGPT, ALP, ACP, total bilirubin and direct bilirubin of blood. It was found that the RB1 and RB2 offer protection against toxin as evidenced by remarkable reduction in all biochemical parameters (P<0.05). The RB2 exhibited maximum hepatoprotective activity compared to RB1.<\/p>\n

Table 1: Effect of RB1 and RB2 on liver function test for different parameters in animals treated with CCl4<\/sub><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Treatment<\/strong><\/td>\nSGOT (AST) (U\/L)<\/strong><\/td>\nSGPT (ALT) (U\/L)<\/strong><\/td>\nALP (U\/L)<\/strong><\/td>\nACP (U\/L)<\/strong><\/td>\nBilirubin (mg\/100 ml of blood)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Direct (mg\/dl)<\/strong><\/td>\nTotal (mg\/dl)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Normal rats<\/td>\n80.17\u00b12.56<\/td>\n72.35\u00b15.13<\/td>\n115.43\u00b13.54<\/td>\n125.64\u00b15.24<\/td>\n0.21\u00b11.53<\/td>\n0.47\u00b11.23<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Control rats [CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)]<\/td>\n195.41\u00b16.23*<\/td>\n223.18\u00b14.18*<\/td>\n251.39\u00b17.53*<\/td>\n242.69\u00b16.24*<\/td>\n3.14\u00b10.14*<\/td>\n5.47\u00b11.19*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB1 (50 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n91.36\u00b16.32a<\/sup><\/td>\n92.13\u00b12.65a<\/sup><\/td>\n162.53\u00b14.23a<\/sup><\/td>\n156.24\u00b16.54a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.51\u00b11.63a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.71\u00b10.18a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB1 (100 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n80.64\u00b14.84a<\/sup><\/td>\n76.53\u00b12.56a<\/sup><\/td>\n120.32\u00b16.23a<\/sup><\/td>\n130.59\u00b15.64a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.28\u00b10.53a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.42\u00b10.43a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB2 (50 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n96.72\u00b14.51a<\/sup><\/td>\n89.12\u00b17.22a<\/sup><\/td>\n141.75\u00b15.74a<\/sup><\/td>\n147.24\u00b16.31a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.45\u00b10.62a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.63\u00b11.34a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB2 (100 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n76.25\u00b11.86a<\/sup><\/td>\n69.49\u00b13.32a<\/sup><\/td>\n110.48\u00b14.23a<\/sup><\/td>\n121.57\u00b13.63a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.23\u00b10.41a<\/sup><\/td>\n0.41\u00b11.37a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Values are expressed as mean \u00b1 SEM, n = 6 in each group. *P<0.05 when compared with normal group, <\/strong>a<\/sup>P<0.05 when compared with CCl4<\/sub> treated group considered as statistically significant.<\/p>\n

Antioxidant activity<\/strong><\/p>\n

The findings of antioxidant study are shown in table 2.\u00a0 The administration of the RB1 (50 mg\/kg and 100 mg\/kg) and RB2 (50 mg\/kg and 100 mg\/kg) counteracted the CCl4<\/sub>-induced free radical activity. The SOD, GPx and CAT enzyme levels were statistically significant increased, whereas lipid peroxidation was decreased, when compared to CCl4<\/sub> treated rats (P < 0.05). These results suggest that the RB1 and RB2 displays an antioxidant activity. The RB2 exhibited maximum antioxidant activity compared to RB1.<\/p>\n

Table 2: Effect of <\/strong>RB1 and RB2 on oxidative stress induced by CCl4<\/sub> in the liver of experimental animals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Treatment<\/strong><\/td>\nEnzymes involved in oxidative stress in liver<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
LPO<\/strong><\/p>\n

(Mole\/gm)<\/strong><\/td>\n

SOD<\/strong><\/p>\n

(U\/gm)<\/strong><\/td>\n

GSH<\/strong><\/p>\n

(\u03bcMole\/gm)<\/strong><\/td>\n

Catalase<\/strong><\/p>\n

(U\/mg)<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Normal rats<\/td>\n58.17\u00b12.34<\/td>\n63.58\u00b12.54<\/td>\n4.61\u00b11.73<\/td>\n9.14\u00b10.43<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Control rats [CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)]<\/td>\n189.42\u00b14.32*<\/td>\n12.51\u00b16.24*<\/td>\n0.24\u00b11.53*<\/td>\n0.92\u00b10.96*<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB1 (50 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n88.73\u00b12.46a<\/sup><\/td>\n40.58\u00b11.32a<\/sup><\/td>\n3.71\u00b11.86a<\/sup><\/td>\n7.15\u00b11.35a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB1 (100 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n62.24\u00b14.35a<\/sup><\/td>\n65.42\u00b11.75a<\/sup><\/td>\n5.29\u00b11.63a<\/sup><\/td>\n9.43\u00b10.37a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB2 (50 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n82.36\u00b11.23a<\/sup><\/td>\n42.79\u00b13.74a<\/sup><\/td>\n3.89\u00b10.32a<\/sup><\/td>\n8.11\u00b10.75a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RB2 (100 mg\/kg)+ CCl4<\/sub> (0.5 ml\/kg i.p.)<\/td>\n61.47\u00b13.46a<\/sup><\/td>\n60.17\u00b12.63a<\/sup><\/td>\n5.09\u00b10.57a<\/sup><\/td>\n10.73\u00b11.34a<\/sup><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Values are expressed as mean \u00b1 SEM, n = 6 in each group. *P<0.05 when compared with normal group, <\/strong>a<\/sup>P<0.05 when compared with CCl4<\/sub> treated group considered as statistically significant<\/p>\n

Liver participate in several metabolic activities, and in order to fulfill this role, release a wide variety of enzymes. Liver can be injured by many toxicants, as well as by chemicals or drugs. In our model, CCl4<\/sub> serves as a toxicant. CCl4<\/sub>-related hepatotoxicity is associated with elevation in enzyme levels, which may be attributed to the generation of trichloromethyl free radical during metabolism by the hepatic microsomes, which in turn begin lipid peroxidation. Hepatocellular necrosis decreases SOD, CAT and GPx activities, and the increase of such activities into basal values, is a clear indication of plasma membrane stabilization and tissue repair as well. Such an effect is in agreement with the view that enzyme activities are restored into normal conditions and healing of the hepatic parenchyma, as well as hepatocyte regeneration, are observed. SOD, CAT, and GPx constitute an enzyme defense mechanism against oxidative damage. Under CCl4<\/sub> conditions such enzyme activities are decreased, but under RB1 and RB2 treated conditions, a significant increase in their activities is observed, which may serve as a biochemical strategy to reduce lipid peroxidation1,2,8<\/sup>. The study revealed that the RB1 and RB2 under evaluation, at both studies doses, showed a hepatoprotective activity against CCl4<\/sub>-induced liver damage. The present findings demonstrated that the RB1 and RB2 have free radical scavenging activity and were prominent in inhibiting the lipid peroxidation. The free radical scavenging properties may be one of the mechanism for protective effects of liver.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

The RB1 and RB2 have resilient antioxidant activity and may confer a favorable effect against oxidative stress. The RB1 and RB2 exhibited significant hepatoprotective activity in rats intoxicated with CCl4<\/sub>. Further the metal-based nanoparticles size of bhasma enhances the bioavailability of therapeutic efficacy. This properties assist the development of newer drugs in modern medicine of Ayurveda.<\/p>\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Roy A, Sahu RK, Gupta R, Pandey P. Hepatoprotective activity of Berberis coriaceae<\/em> on liver damage induced by CCl4<\/sub> in rats. Pharmacologyonline, 2011: 3: 838-842.<\/li>\n
  2. Sahu RK, Roy A. Hepatoprotective activity of ethanolic extract of bark of Ougeinia oojeinensis<\/em> (Roxb.) Hochr in CCl4<\/sub> treated male rats. Pharmacologyonline, 2009: 2 (May-August): 1-5.<\/li>\n
  3. Saleem TSM, Chetty CM, Ramkanth S, Rajan VST, Kumar KM, Gauthaman K. Hepatoprotective Herbs \u2013 A Review. J. Res. Pharm. Sci. 2010; 1(1) 1-5.<\/li>\n
  4. Vayalil PK, Kuttan G, Kuttan R. Rasayanas: Evidence for the concept of prevention of diseases.\u00a0Am J Chin Med\u00a02002; 30:155\u201371.<\/li>\n
  5. Pal D, Sahu CK, Halda A. Bhasma: The ancient Indian nanomedicine. J Adv Pharm Technol Res 2014; 5: 4\u201312.<\/li>\n
  6. Hebbar KR, Gokarn R, Madhusudhana K, Kallianpur S, Bhat S, Shobha KL. Anti-microbial study of calcined sliver<\/em> (Rajata bhasma). Int J Res Ayurveda Pharm 2016; 7(6): 56-59.<\/li>\n
  7. Sharma M, Abid R, Ahmad Y, Nabi NG, Protective Effect of Leaves of Ficus carica <\/em>Against Carbon Tetrachloride-Induced hepatic Damage in Rats, UK Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biosciences, 5(1), 2017, 06-11.<\/li>\n
  8. Chatterjee DP, Sahu RK, Jha AK, Dwivedi J. Assessment of hepatoprotective activity of chloroform and ethanol extracts of whole plant of\u00a0Cuscuta reflexa<\/em>\u00a0in CCl4<\/sub>\u00a0treated ratsand effectiveness of extracts on lipoprotein secretion by hepatic cells. Pharmacologyonline. 2010; 3: 799-809.<\/li>\n
  9. Gupta GD, Singhal KG, Hepatoprotective and antioxidant activity of methanolic extract of flowers of Nerium oleander<\/em> against CCl4-induced liver injury in rats, Asian Pac J Trop Med, 5(9),\u00a0 2012, 677-85.<\/li>\n
  10. Ellman GL. Tissue sulfhydryl groups. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics. 1959; 82: 70\u201377.<\/li>\n
  11. Kakkar P, Das B, Vishwanath PN. A modified spectrophotometric assay of superoxide dismutase. Indian Journal of Biochemistry & Biophysics.1984; 21: 130-132.<\/li>\n
  12. Woolson RF, Clarke WR. Statistical methods for the analysis of biochemical data. Wiley, New York. 2002; 2: 315-316\u00a0<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Introduction Liver is the biggest organ in the vertebrate body […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[73],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29419","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-vol12no4"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29419","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29419"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29419\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40464,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29419\/revisions\/40464"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29419"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29419"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29419"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}