Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2021 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Research, Society and Development |
Texto Completo: | https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/17257 |
Resumo: | “Arnica” extracts are widely used in folk medicine to treat acute and chronic inflammatory ailments. Nevertheless, their toxic effects upon systemic use are still not fully understood. Therefore, this work provides a systematic review on the safety of arnica extracts following preclinical trials covering their oral and intraperitoneal administration in animal models. Henceforth, PRISMA guideline was followed and the study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42020167112). Searches were performed in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), and Health Virtual Library (BVS) databases; while SYRCLE’s Risk of Bias tool and CAMARADES checklist were used to assess scientific quality. From 382 articles, five studies met eligibility criteria and underwent qualitative analysis. Data of acute toxicity was reported in all the selected articles, and the treatment time was up to 14 days. Moreover, the following species were reported: Solidago chilensis (hazard categories of 4 and 5 for i.p and v.o administration, respectively); Solidago microglossa (hazard category of 3, i.p); Lychnophora trichocarpha (hazard category of ≥ 4, i.p); and Lychnophora pinaster (hazard category of ≥ 4, v.o). The alcoholic extracts showcased greater toxic potential, which increased in a dose-dependent manner after 100 mg/Kg. Concerning organ-specific toxicity, the articles reported hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity following histopathological analysis. However, the safety of S. chilensis, L. pinaster, L. trichocarpha, and S. microglossa following systemic administration remains unclear due to the limited experimental quality of the included papers, as well as the lack of reported chronic toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and mutagenicity studies. |
id |
UNIFEI_b8e2f13d2b6d912f437c13afee64b864 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/17257 |
network_acronym_str |
UNIFEI |
network_name_str |
Research, Society and Development |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials¿Es segura la administración sistémica de extractos de árnica? Una revisión sistemática de ensayos pré-clínicosA administração sistêmica de extratos de arnica é segura? Uma revisão sistemática de ensaios pré-clínicosAdministração oralArnicaInjeções intraperitoneaisRevisão sistemáticaToxicidade.AdministrationOralArnicaInjectionsIntraperitonealSystematic reviewToxicity.Administración OralÁrnicaInyecciones intraperitonealesRevisión sistemáticaToxicidade.“Arnica” extracts are widely used in folk medicine to treat acute and chronic inflammatory ailments. Nevertheless, their toxic effects upon systemic use are still not fully understood. Therefore, this work provides a systematic review on the safety of arnica extracts following preclinical trials covering their oral and intraperitoneal administration in animal models. Henceforth, PRISMA guideline was followed and the study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42020167112). Searches were performed in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), and Health Virtual Library (BVS) databases; while SYRCLE’s Risk of Bias tool and CAMARADES checklist were used to assess scientific quality. From 382 articles, five studies met eligibility criteria and underwent qualitative analysis. Data of acute toxicity was reported in all the selected articles, and the treatment time was up to 14 days. Moreover, the following species were reported: Solidago chilensis (hazard categories of 4 and 5 for i.p and v.o administration, respectively); Solidago microglossa (hazard category of 3, i.p); Lychnophora trichocarpha (hazard category of ≥ 4, i.p); and Lychnophora pinaster (hazard category of ≥ 4, v.o). The alcoholic extracts showcased greater toxic potential, which increased in a dose-dependent manner after 100 mg/Kg. Concerning organ-specific toxicity, the articles reported hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity following histopathological analysis. However, the safety of S. chilensis, L. pinaster, L. trichocarpha, and S. microglossa following systemic administration remains unclear due to the limited experimental quality of the included papers, as well as the lack of reported chronic toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and mutagenicity studies.Los extractos de "árnica" se utilizan ampliamente en la medicina popular para tratar dolencias inflamatorias agudas y crónicas. Sin embargo, sus efectos tóxicos sobre el uso sistémico aún no se comprenden completamente. Por lo tanto, este trabajo proporciona una revisión sistemática sobre la seguridad de los extractos de árnica después de ensayos preclínicos que cubren su administración oral e intraperitoneal en modelos animales. En adelante se siguió la guía PRISMA y se registró el protocolo del estudio en PROSPERO (CDR42020167112). Las búsquedas se realizaron en las bases de datos PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (Science Citation Index) y Health Virtual Library (BVS); mientras que la herramienta Riesgo de sesgo de SYRCLE y la lista de verificación CAMARADES se utilizaron para evaluar la calidad científica. De 382 artículos, cinco estudios cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad y se sometieron a análisis cualitativos. Los datos de toxicidad aguda se informaron en todos los artículos seleccionados y el tiempo de tratamiento fue de hasta 14 días. Además, se notificaron las siguientes especies: Solidago chilensis (categorías de peligro 4 y 5 para administración i.p y v.o, respectivamente); Solidago microglossa (categoría de peligro 3, i.p); Lychnophora trichocarpha (categoría de riesgo ≥ 4, i.p); y Lychnophora pinaster (categoría de riesgo ≥ 4, v.o). Los extractos alcohólicos presentaron un mayor potencial tóxico, el cual aumentó de manera dosis-dependiente a partir de los 100 mg / kg. Con respecto a la toxicidad específica de órganos, los artículos informaron sobre hepatotoxicidad y nefrotoxicidad después del análisis histopatológico. Sin embargo, la seguridad de S. chilensis, L. pinaster, L. trichocarpha y S. microglossa después de la administración sistémica sigue sin estar clara debido a la limitada calidad experimental de los artículos incluidos, así como a la falta de estudios de toxicidad crónica, farmacocinética y de mutagenicidad.Os extratos de “Arnica” são amplamente usados na medicina popular para tratar doenças inflamatórias agudas e crônicas. No entanto, seus efeitos tóxicos mediante uso sistêmico ainda não são totalmente compreendidos. Portanto, este trabalho fornece uma revisão sistemática sobre a segurança de extratos de arnica em ensaios pré-clínicos cobrindo sua administração oral e intraperitoneal em modelos animais. Para tanto, a diretriz PRISMA foi seguida e o protocolo do estudo foi registrado no PROSPERO (CDR42020167112). As pesquisas foram realizadas nas bases de dados PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (Science Citation Index) e Biblioteca Virtual da Saúde (BVS); enquanto a ferramenta de risco de viés do SYRCLE e o checklist CAMARADES foram usadas para avaliar a qualidade científica. De 382 artigos, cinco estudos atenderam aos critérios de elegibilidade e foram submetidos à análise qualitativa. Dados de toxicidade aguda foram relatados em todos os artigos selecionados, e o tempo de tratamento foi de até 14 dias. Além disso, as seguintes espécies foram relatadas: Solidago chilensis (categorias de perigo de 4 e 5 para administração i.p e v.o, respectivamente); Solidago microglossa (categoria de perigo de 3, i.p); Lychnophora trichocarpha (categoria de perigo ≥ 4, i.p); e Lychnophora pinaster (categoria de perigo ≥ 4, v.o). Os extratos alcoólicos apresentaram maior potencial tóxico, que aumentou de forma dose-dependente após 100 mg/Kg. Com relação à toxicidade órgão-específico, os artigos relataram hepatotoxicidade e nefrotoxicidade após análise histopatológica. No entanto, a segurança de S. chilensis, L. pinaster, L. trichocarpha e S. microglossa após a administração sistêmica permanece incerta devido à qualidade experimental limitada dos artigos incluídos, bem como a falta de relatos sobre toxicidade crônica, farmacocinética e estudos de mutagenicidade.Research, Society and Development2021-07-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/1725710.33448/rsd-v10i8.17257Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 8; e27110817257Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 8; e27110817257Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 8; e271108172572525-3409reponame:Research, Society and Developmentinstname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)instacron:UNIFEIporhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/17257/15479Copyright (c) 2021 Virgínia Moura Oliveira; Douglas Vieira Thomaz; Farah Maria Drumond Chequer Baldoni; Nayara Ragi Baldoni; Renê Oliveira do Coutohttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessOliveira, Virgínia Moura Thomaz, Douglas Vieira Baldoni, Farah Maria Drumond ChequerBaldoni, Nayara Ragi Couto, Renê Oliveira do2021-08-21T18:46:59Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/17257Revistahttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/indexPUBhttps://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/oairsd.articles@gmail.com2525-34092525-3409opendoar:2024-01-17T09:37:38.250768Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials ¿Es segura la administración sistémica de extractos de árnica? Una revisión sistemática de ensayos pré-clínicos A administração sistêmica de extratos de arnica é segura? Uma revisão sistemática de ensaios pré-clínicos |
title |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
spellingShingle |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials Oliveira, Virgínia Moura Administração oral Arnica Injeções intraperitoneais Revisão sistemática Toxicidade. Administration Oral Arnica Injections Intraperitoneal Systematic review Toxicity. Administración Oral Árnica Inyecciones intraperitoneales Revisión sistemática Toxicidade. |
title_short |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
title_full |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
title_fullStr |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
title_sort |
Is the systemic administration of arnica extracts safe? A systematic review of preclinical trials |
author |
Oliveira, Virgínia Moura |
author_facet |
Oliveira, Virgínia Moura Thomaz, Douglas Vieira Baldoni, Farah Maria Drumond Chequer Baldoni, Nayara Ragi Couto, Renê Oliveira do |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Thomaz, Douglas Vieira Baldoni, Farah Maria Drumond Chequer Baldoni, Nayara Ragi Couto, Renê Oliveira do |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Oliveira, Virgínia Moura Thomaz, Douglas Vieira Baldoni, Farah Maria Drumond Chequer Baldoni, Nayara Ragi Couto, Renê Oliveira do |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Administração oral Arnica Injeções intraperitoneais Revisão sistemática Toxicidade. Administration Oral Arnica Injections Intraperitoneal Systematic review Toxicity. Administración Oral Árnica Inyecciones intraperitoneales Revisión sistemática Toxicidade. |
topic |
Administração oral Arnica Injeções intraperitoneais Revisão sistemática Toxicidade. Administration Oral Arnica Injections Intraperitoneal Systematic review Toxicity. Administración Oral Árnica Inyecciones intraperitoneales Revisión sistemática Toxicidade. |
description |
“Arnica” extracts are widely used in folk medicine to treat acute and chronic inflammatory ailments. Nevertheless, their toxic effects upon systemic use are still not fully understood. Therefore, this work provides a systematic review on the safety of arnica extracts following preclinical trials covering their oral and intraperitoneal administration in animal models. Henceforth, PRISMA guideline was followed and the study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42020167112). Searches were performed in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), and Health Virtual Library (BVS) databases; while SYRCLE’s Risk of Bias tool and CAMARADES checklist were used to assess scientific quality. From 382 articles, five studies met eligibility criteria and underwent qualitative analysis. Data of acute toxicity was reported in all the selected articles, and the treatment time was up to 14 days. Moreover, the following species were reported: Solidago chilensis (hazard categories of 4 and 5 for i.p and v.o administration, respectively); Solidago microglossa (hazard category of 3, i.p); Lychnophora trichocarpha (hazard category of ≥ 4, i.p); and Lychnophora pinaster (hazard category of ≥ 4, v.o). The alcoholic extracts showcased greater toxic potential, which increased in a dose-dependent manner after 100 mg/Kg. Concerning organ-specific toxicity, the articles reported hepatotoxicity and nephrotoxicity following histopathological analysis. However, the safety of S. chilensis, L. pinaster, L. trichocarpha, and S. microglossa following systemic administration remains unclear due to the limited experimental quality of the included papers, as well as the lack of reported chronic toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and mutagenicity studies. |
publishDate |
2021 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2021-07-12 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/17257 10.33448/rsd-v10i8.17257 |
url |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/17257 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.33448/rsd-v10i8.17257 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/17257/15479 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 No. 8; e27110817257 Research, Society and Development; Vol. 10 Núm. 8; e27110817257 Research, Society and Development; v. 10 n. 8; e27110817257 2525-3409 reponame:Research, Society and Development instname:Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) instacron:UNIFEI |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
instacron_str |
UNIFEI |
institution |
UNIFEI |
reponame_str |
Research, Society and Development |
collection |
Research, Society and Development |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Research, Society and Development - Universidade Federal de Itajubá (UNIFEI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
rsd.articles@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1797052681818210304 |