Effect of Indigofera aspalathoides on complete Freund’s adjuvant-induced arthritis in rats

Figures & data

Table 1.  Effect of EIA on CFA-induced paw edema in rats.

Treatment	Dose (mg/kg)	Paw volume (mL)
		Day 7	Day 14	Day 21	Day 30
Normal (normal saline)	2 mL/kg	0.21 ± 0.01	0.20 ± 0.01	0.26 ± 0.01	0.24 ± 0.01
CFA	0.1 mL	0.56 ± 0.02^a	0.64 ± 0.01^a	0.72 ± 0.02^a	0.74 ± 0.03 ^a
EIA	250	0.27 ± 0.01^b, d	0.32 ± 0.01^a,d	0.36 ± 0.01^a,d	0.39 ± 0.01^a,d
	500	0.24 ± 0.01^d	0.28 ± 0.02^c,d	0.31 ± 0.01^d	0.34 ± 0.01^c,d

N = 6 rats in each group.

^aP <0.001; ^bP <0.05; ^cP <0.01 versus normal; ^dP <0.001 versus CFA.

Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA followed by Tukey multiple comparison test.

Table 2.  Effect of EIA on biochemical parameters against CFA-induced arthritis in rats.

Treatment	Dose (mg/kg)	AST U/L	ALT U/L	ALP U/L	Total protein mg%	Cholesterol mg%	Triglyceride mg%
Normal (normal saline)	2 mL/kg	54.5 ± 1.65	51.25 ± 1.78	177.5 ± 3.52	6.27 ± 0.34	61.75 ± 1.8	67 ± 1.36
CFA	0.1 mL	156.2 ± 3.49^a	67.8 ± 1.90 ^a	301 ± 5.48 ^a	7.46 ± 0.49	68.8 ± 1.15 ^b	99.2 ± 1.59^a
EIA	250	122.0 ± 2.64 ^a,d	62.0 ± 1.22 ^a	254.0 ± 7.4^a,d	6.36 ± 0.19	58.6 ± 1.27^a,d	78.4 ± 1.60 ^a
	500	98.5 ± 1.54^a,d	57.6 ± 1.08^b,e	206.0 ± 4.93^c,d	6.24 ± 0.35	55.8 ± 1.93^d	65.4 ± 1.23^d

N = 6 rats in each group.

^aP <0.001; ^bP <0.05; ^cP <0.01 versus normal; ^dP <0.001; ^eP <0.01 versus CFA.

Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA followed by Tukey multiple comparison test.

Table 3.  Effect of EIA on antioxidant status in liver of control and experimental animals.

Treatment	Dose (mg/kg)	LPO	SOD	CAT	GPx
Normal (normal saline)	2 mL/kg	141.8 ± 4.48	4.74 ± 0.03	46.56 ± 1.4	9.65 ± 1.50
CFA	0.1mL	394.2 ± 11.94^a	1.91 ± 0.02^a	33.92 ± 2.59^b	5.15 ± 0.65
EIA	250	179.55 ± 3.18^b,c	2.51 ± 0.02^a,c	40.12 ± 1.12^d	7.12 ± 0.80^c
	500	158.6 ± 2.10^c	3.28 ± 0.06^a,c	44.16 ± 1.16^d	9.10 ± 0.35^e

N = 6 rats in each group.

^aP <0.001; ^bP <0.01 versus normal; ^cP <0.001; ^dP<0.01; ^eP <0.05 versus CFA.

Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA followed by Tukey multiple comparison test.

LPO = μmoles of MDA/min/mg protein; GPx = μmoles of GSH oxidized/min/mg protein; SOD = Units/min/mg protein; CAT = μmole of H₂O₂ consumed/min/mg protein.

Table 4.  Effect of EIA on antioxidant status in kidney of control and experimental animals.

Treatment	Dose (mg/kg)	LPO	SOD	CAT	GPx
Normal (normal saline)	2 mL/kg	83.62 ± 2.90	3.49 ± 0.46	36.12 ± 1.04	4.65 ± 0.84
CFA	0.1mL	127.04 ± 3.94^a	1.88 ± 0.11^c	21.53 ± 1.47 ^a	2.31 ± 0.36^b
EIA	250	98.77 ± 1.56^b,d	2.13 ± 0.02^c	28.42 ± 1.08^b	3.42 ± 0.28
	500	87.5 ± 1.42^d	2.96 ± 0.14^f	31.64 ± 1.35^d	4.01 ± 0.17

N = 6 rats in each group.

^aP <0.001; ^bP <0.05; ^cP <0.01 versus normal; ^dP <0.001; ^eP <0.01; ^fP <0.05 versus CFA.

Data were analyzed by one way ANOVA followed by Tukey multiple comparison test.

LPO = μ moles of MDA/ min/mg protein; GPx = μ moles of GSH oxidised/min /mg protein; SOD = Units/min/mg protein; CAT = μ mole of H₂O₂ consumed/ min/mg protein.