ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE： To compare the difference in volatile oil constituents of Glehniae littoralis from 3 producing areas as Shandong Laiyang， Hebei Anguo， Inner Mongolian Chifeng. METHODS： The method of steam distillation was used to extract the volatile oil of G. littoralis from different areas and calculate the extraction rate. The constituents of volatile oil were analyzed by using GC-MS. The data was corrected by Xcalibur chemical workstation. The constituents were searched by NIST 11.0 mass spectrometry database （matching degree ＞800）， and the relative mass fraction of each chemical constituent was obtained by peak area normalization. RESULTS： The extraction rate of volatile oil in G. littoralis from Laiyang was 0.013％， which was far lower than G. littoralis from Anguo （0.099％） and G. littoralis from Chifeng （0.105％）. There were 15， 18 and 27 constituents identified in volatile oil of G. littoralis from 3 producing areas； the relative mass fractions were 89.29％， 96.76％， 94.53％. Falcarinol was a common compound with the highest relative mass fraction of the volatile oil of G. littoralis from different producing areas； the relative mass fractions were 69.79％， 90.89％ and 71.04％， respectively. Fatty acids were rich in the sample from Laiyang， while C15H24 sesquiterpenoids were rich in the other samples from Anguo and Chifeng. CONCLUSIONS： Volatile oil of G. littoralis could be used as potential chemical markers to distinguish different producing areas due to their significant differences in chemical components.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:Tissue engineering scaffolds can create proper nerve regeneration microenvironment, enrich nutritional factors for nerve regeneration and promote axonal growth. OBJECTIVE:To review the progress of tissue engineering scaffolds in nerve repair in recent years. METHODS:A computer-based retrieval was performed to search ful-text articles addressing tissue engineering scaffolds used to repair nerve damage published from 2009 to 2014 in PubMed databases using the keywords of “nerve regeneration, prostheses and implants” as wel as articles published from 2004 to 2014 in CNKI database using the keywords of “nerve repair, material” in Chinese. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Currently, scaffold materials for nerve damage mainly include natural materials, naturaly derived materials, synthetic materials and composites, al of which have their own advantages and disadvantages. By chemical crosslinkers or chemical modification, the naturaly derived polymer can be combined with other natural or synthetic composite materials, to improve their physicochemical and biological properties, i.e., the composite scaffolds have better effects than single materials in nerve regeneration. Therefore the current research focus is composite materials. In clinical research, colagen scaffold for nerve repair has entered the clinical research stage.