Evaluation of prophylactic and therapeutic effects of ruscogenin on acute radiation proctitis: an experimental rat model.
10.4174/astr.2018.94.4.174
- Author:
Erkan YAVUZ
1
;
Onur Olgac KARAGULLE
;
Gulcin ERCAN
;
Atilla CELIK
;
Hakan YIGITBAS
;
Busra Yaprak BAYRAK
;
Rumeysa TARTAR
;
Ramazan KUSASLAN
;
Yuksel ALTINEL
;
Osman Bilgin GULCICEK
Author Information
1. Department of General Surgery, Istanbul Bagcilar Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey. 81drerkanyavuz@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Ruscogenin;
Proctitis;
Radiation
- MeSH:
Abscess;
Animals;
Epithelium;
Fibroblast Growth Factor 2;
Inflammation;
Microscopy;
Models, Animal*;
Proctitis*;
Radiation, Ionizing;
Rats*;
Rats, Sprague-Dawley;
Rectum;
Therapeutic Uses*
- From:Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
2018;94(4):174-182
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Radiation proctitis (RP) is inflammation and damage to the rectum, manifested secondary to ionizing radiation utilized for treatment. In this study, we evaluated the anti-inflammatory therapeutical and protective effects of ruscogenin in a model of acute RP. METHODS: Thirty-two Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 4 groups (n = 8) as sham, control, treatment, and prophylaxis groups. Prophylaxis group and treatment group were dosed ruscogenin by oral gavage for 14 days pre- and postradiation. At the end of the 28th day, all subjects were sacrificed. RESULTS: Histopathological analysis showed a significant increase in cryptitis abscess, cryptitis and reactive atypia, and depth of lymphocytic infiltration of the control group, compared to the other groups (P < 0.05), while treatment and prophylaxis groups showed significant decreases (P < 0.05). Immunohistochemical analysis indicated that immunoreactivity were significantly higher in control group (P < 0.05, P < 0.001, and P < 0.01, respectively), but vice versa for treatment and prophylaxis groups. There was not any significant difference for fibroblast growth factor 2 immunoreactivity. The epithelium of control rectums indicated an increase in TNF-α immunoreactivity while other groups had significant decrease (P < 0.01). Electron microscopical findings were parallel to light microscopy. CONCLUSION: In this study, ruscogenin was observed to be effective on prophylaxis or treatment of acute RP. Although there are various reports on the treatment of the rectum damaged by acute RP in the literature, this could be the first study since there is no research indicating the ultrastructural effect of ruscogenin.
