Home › Research › Biomarkers
Chrysin improves cognitive deficits and brain damage induced by chronic cerebral hypoperfusion in rats
He XL, Wang YH, Bi MG, Du GH.. European journal of pharmacology, 2012-01-31
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Chronic cerebral hypoperfusion, induced by permanent occlusion of bilateral common carotid arteries (2VO), is related to neurological disorders and contributes to cognitive decline. Chrysin (5,7-dihydroxyflavone) is an important member of the flavonoid family. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of chrysin on cognitive deficits and brain damage in this rat 2VO model. At 52days after ligation, the escape latency in Morris water maze was significantly increased in rats subjected to 2VO, the neuronal damage was also increased accompanied by a large proliferation in glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) immunoreactivity with marked white matter lesions, and neuronal cell apoptosis, all of which were significantly alleviated by long treatment of chrysin (30mg/kg). Biochemical examinations revealed that chrysin decreased lipid peroxide, reduced the increased activities of superoxide dismutase, and attenuated the decreased activities of glutathione peroxidase in 2VO rats. The results suggest that chrysin may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of neurodegeneration and dementia caused by decreased cerebral blood flow, which is most likely related, at least in part, to its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
He, X. L., Wang, Y. H., Bi, M. G., & Du, G. H. (2012). Chrysin improves cognitive deficits and brain damage induced by chronic cerebral hypoperfusion in rats. European journal of pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2012.01.025
Vancouver
He XL, Wang YH, Bi MG, Du GH. Chrysin improves cognitive deficits and brain damage induced by chronic cerebral hypoperfusion in rats. European journal of pharmacology. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2012.01.025. PMID: 22314218.
BibTeX
@article{he2012-22314218,
author = {He, X. L. and Wang, Y. H. and Bi, M. G. and Du, G. H.},
title = {{Chrysin improves cognitive deficits and brain damage induced by chronic cerebral hypoperfusion in rats}},
journal = {European journal of pharmacology},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.ejphar.2012.01.025},
pmid = {22314218},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2012.01.025}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- At 52days after ligation, the escape latency in Morris water maze was significantly increased in rats subjected to 2VO, the neuronal damage was also increased accompanied by a large proliferation in glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) immunoreactivity with marked white matter lesions, and neuronal cell apoptosis, all of which were significantly alleviated by long treatment of chrysin (30mg/kg).
- Biochemical examinations revealed that chrysin decreased lipid peroxide, reduced the increased activities of superoxide dismutase, and attenuated the decreased activities of glutathione peroxidase in 2VO rats.
- The results suggest that chrysin may have therapeutic potential for the treatment of neurodegeneration and dementia caused by decreased cerebral blood flow, which is most likely related, at least in part, to its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European journal of pharmacology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Laboratory or animal study (title names “rats”) — scores zero |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22314218) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.