Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Add filters

Year range
Chinese Journal of Rheumatology ; (12): 315-320,C5-3-C5-4, 2023.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-992935


Objective:The therapeutic effect of less polar ginsenosides on rats with rheumatoid arthritis was studied, and the metabolic pathway that produce anti-inflammatory effect of less polar ginsenosides was identified.Methods:Rats were randomly divided into the control group, the model group, methotrexate treatment group, and high dose, medium dose, and low dose less polar ginsenosides groups. After 30 days of oral administration, less polar ginsenosides reduced the disease activity significantly in rats with rheumatoid arthritis. Blood and ankle synovial tissue metabolisms were measured by ultra performance liquid chromatography (UPLC) tandem mass spectrometry (MS) to explore the mechanism of less polar ginsenosides.The resulting data were subjected to principal component analysis and orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis(OPLS-DA).Results:Compared with the model group, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and RF decreased significantly in the high dose of less polar ginsenosides ( P<0.01). Metabolomics showed that R2X and R2Y of serum OPLS-DA were 0.626 and 0.904 respectively. The R2X and R2Y of synovial OPLS-DA were 0.429 and 0.689 respectively. Major differential metabolites were identified in the model group of rats, including arachidonic acid, valine, linoleic acid, and guanine nucleoside, etc. The main differential metabolites were identified in rats in the high dose group of less polar ginsenosides, including linoleic acid, betaine, eicosapentaenoic acid, alanine, methionine sulfoxide, isoleucine, etc. Conclusion:The metabolic spectrum has shown that inflammation is associated with linoleic acid metabolism, valine, leucine and isoleucine degradation, arachidonic acid metabolism. Less polar ginsenosides regulatethe linolenic acid metabolism, methionine metabolism and glucose alanine cycle.

Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ; (53): 5351-5355, 2015.
Article in Chinese | WPRIM | ID: wpr-480440


BACKGROUND:There are less reports on the evaluation of plantar pressure distribution in knee osteoarthritis patients using modern gait analysis, and moreover, the database of characteristic plantar pressure has not been established in patients with osteoarthritis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the therapeutic effect of Chinese massage and functional exercise on knee osteoarthritis. METHODS:Forty patients with left knee osteoarthritis who were eligible for the inclusive criteria were randomized into two groups, with 20 in each group. Control group was given conventional treatment, and treatment group was given Chinese massage combined with functional exercise. Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and gait parameters were measured and compared between two groups before and at 3 months after treatment. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:After treatment, the two groups both had evident efficacy in pain relief during walking, and there was no statisticaly difference between the two groups. There was a significant difference in the knee range of motion in the patients in the treatment group when going upstairs and downstairs as wel as during joint flexion before and after treatment, but no changes occurred in the control group. After treatment, the range of motion during joint flexion was better in the treatment group than the control group, but there was no difference in the sweling reduction between the two groups. In addition, the treatment group had a higher Japanese Orthopaedic Association score after treatment than before treatment (P < 0.05), and there was no statistical difference in the control group. Gait analysis showed that there were improvements in the percentage of contact time, parameters during stance phase and peak plantar pressure in the two groups, but there was no significant difference before and after treatment. Foot axis angle in the treatment group was improved significantly, which was significantly better than that in the control group. Al the indexes in the treatment group were improved a lot, but did not reach the normal.