Advertisement

Advances in Therapy

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 159–167 | Cite as

Effect of propolis on healing in experimental colon anastomosis in rats

  • Muhyittin Temiz
  • Ahmet Aslan
  • Elif Canbolant
  • Sibel Hakverdi
  • Gurbuz Polat
  • Semire Uzun
  • Abdulkerim Temiz
  • Ramazan Gonenci
Article

Abstract

Introduction

Propolis is the generic name for the resinous substance collected by honeybees, which is known to have antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, apoptosis-inducible effects. Anastomotic dehiscence after colorectal surgery is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to assess the effect of propolis on healing in an experimental colon anastomosis in rats.

Methods

Forty adult male Wistar albino rats were randomly assigned into 5 treatment groups with 8 rats in each: Group I, anastomosis+no treatment; Group II, anastomosis+oral propolis (600 mg/kg/d); Group III, anastomosis+oral ethyl alcohol (1 cc/d); Group IV, anastomosis+rectal propolis (600 mg/kg/d); Group V, anastomosis+rectal ethyl alcohol (1 cc/d). The bursting pressures, hydroxiproline levels and histopathological changes in each group were measured.

Results

When bursting pressures were compared between groups, we observed that they were increased in the groups treated with propolis in contrast to all other groups. Hydroxiproline levels in the propolis groups were also significantly increased in contrast to the other groups. There was also a statistically significant difference in histopathological changes between the treatment types. When propolis administration methods were compared, we did not observe a statistically significant difference.

Conclusion

Propolis has a significantly favourable effect on healing in experimental colon anastomosis, independent from the method of administration.

Keywords

anastomosis colon healing propolis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Nagaoka T, Banskota AH, Tezuka Y, Saiki I, Kadota S. Selective antiproliferative activity of caffeic acid phenethyl ester analogues on highly liver-metastatic murine colon 26-L5 carcinoma cell line. Bioorg Med Chem. 2002;10:3351–3359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vieira O, Laranjinha J, Madeira V, Almeida L. Cholesteryl ester hydroperoxide formation in myoglobin-catalyzed low density lipoprotein oxidation: concerted antioxidant activity of caffeic and p-coumaric acids with ascorbate. Biochem Pharmacol. 1998;55:333–340.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Koshihara Y, Neichi T, Murota S, Lao A, Fujimoto Y, Tatsuno T. Caffeic acid is a selective inhibitor for leukotriene biosynthesis. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1984;792:92–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Michaluart P, Masferrer JL, Carothers AM, et al. Inhibitory effects of caffeic acid phenethyl ester on the activity and expression of cyclooxygenase-2 in human oral epithelial cells and in a rat model of inflammation. Cancer Res. 1999;59:2347–2352.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chan WS, Wen PC, Chiang HC. Structure-activity relationship of caffeic acid analogues on xanthine oxidase inhibition. Anticancer Res. 1995;15:703–707.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ploemen JH, van Ommen B, de Haan A, Schefferlie JG, van Bladeren PJ. In vitro and in vivo reversible and irreversible inhibition of rat glutathione S-transferase isoenzymes by caffeic acid and its 2-Sglutathionyl conjugate. Food Chem Toxicol. 1993;31:475–482.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tanaka T, Kojima T, Kawamori T, et al. Inhibition of 4-nitroquinoline-1-oxideinduced rat tongue carcinogenesis by the naturally occurring plant phenolics caffeic, ellagic, chlorogenic and ferulic acids. Carcinogenesis. 1993;14:1321–1325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frenkel K, Wei H, Bhimani R, et al. Inhibition of tumor promoter-mediated processes in mouse skin and bovine lens by caffeic acid phenethyl ester. Cancer Res. 1993;53:1255–1261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fernandez MA, Saenz MT, Garcia MD. Anti-inflammatory activity in rats and mice of phenolic acids isolated from Scrophularia frutescens. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1998;50:1183–1186.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liao HF, Chen YY, Liu JJ, et al. Inhibitory effect of caffeic acid phenethyl ester on angiogenesis, tumor invasion, and metastasis. J Agric Food Chem. 2003;51:7907–7912.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burdock GA. Review of the biological properties and toxicity of bee propolis (propolis). Food Chem Toxicol. 1998;36:347–363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Waninger J, Kauffmann GW, Shah IA, Farthmann EH. Influence of the distance between interrupted sutures and the tension of sutures on the healing of experimental colonic anastomoses. Am J Surg. 1992;163:319–323.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nursal TZ, Anarat R, Bircan S, Yildirim S, Tarim A, Haberal M. The effect of tissue adhesive, octyl-cyanoacrylate, on the healing of experimental high-risk and normal colonic anastomoses. Am J Surg. 2004;187:28–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sakallioglu AE, Yagmurlu A, Dindar H, Hasirci N, Renda N, Deveci MS. Sustained local application of low-dose epidermal growth factor on steroid-inhibited colonic wound healing. J Pediatr Surg. 2004;39:591–595.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hendriks JM, Hubens G, Wuyts FL, Vermeulen P, Hubens A, Eyskens E. Experimental study of intraperitoneal suramin on the healing of colonic anastomosis. Br J Surg. 1999;86:1171–1175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Turkcapar AG, Demirer S, Sengul N, et al. The adverse effects of octreotide on the healing of colonic anastomosis. Surg Today. 1998;28:279–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jin UH, Chung TW, Kang SK, et al. Caffeic acid phenyl ester in propolis is a strong inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and invasion inhibitor: isolation and identification. Clin Chim Acta. 2005;362:57–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Krell R. Value-Added Products From Beekeeping. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 124. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome; 1996.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sahinler N, Kaftanoglu O. Natural product propolis: chemical composition. Nat Prod Res. 2005;19:183–188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bergman I, Loxly R. Two impaired and simplified methods for the spectro-photometric determination of hydroxyproline. Ann Chem. 1963;35:1961–1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Castaldo S, Capasso F. Propolis, an old remedy used in modern medicine. Fitoterapia. 2002;73(suppl 1):S1–S6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brasken P, Lehto M, Renvall S. Changes in the connective tissue composition of the submucosal layer of colonic anastomosis. Acta Chir Scand. 1989;155:413–419.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kologlu M, Yorganci K, Renda N, Sayek I. Effect of local and remote ischemiareperfusion injury on healing of colonic anastomoses. Surgery. 2000;128:99–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thornton FJ, Barbul A. Healing in the gastrointestinal tract. Surg Clin North Am. 1997;77:549–573.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kologlu M, Sayek I, Kologlu LB, Onat D. Effect of persistently elevated intraabdominal pressure on healing of colonic anastomoses. Am J Surg. 1999;178:293–297.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Graham MF, Blowquist P, Zederfeldt B. The alimentary canal. In: Cohen IK, Deigelman RF, Lindblad WJ, eds. Wound Healing: Biochemical and Clinical Aspects. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1992:433–449.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Demirogullari B, Sonmez K, Turkyilmaz Z, et al. Comparison of consequent small bowel anastomoses after transient ischemia: an experimental study in rats. J Pediatr Surg. 1998;33:91–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Agren MS, Andersen TL, Mirastschijski U, et al. Action of matrix metalloproteinases at restricted sites in colon anastomosis repair: an immunohistochemical and biochemical study. Surgery. 2006;140:72–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stumpf M, Klinge U, Wilms A, et al. Changes of the extracellular matrix as a risk factor for anastomotic leakage after large bowel surgery. Surgery. 2005;137:229–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Healthcare Communications 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muhyittin Temiz
    • 1
  • Ahmet Aslan
    • 1
  • Elif Canbolant
    • 1
  • Sibel Hakverdi
    • 2
  • Gurbuz Polat
    • 3
  • Semire Uzun
    • 4
  • Abdulkerim Temiz
    • 5
  • Ramazan Gonenci
    • 6
  1. 1.Faculty of Medicine, Department of General SurgeryMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Medicine, Department of PathologyMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey
  3. 3.School of Medicine, Department of BiochemistryMersin UniversityMercin, IçelTurkey
  4. 4.Faculty of Medicine, Department of BiophysicsMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey
  5. 5.Faculty of Medicine, Department of Paediatric SurgeryMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey
  6. 6.Veterinary FacultyMustafa Kemal UniversityAntakya, HatayTurkey

Personalised recommendations