ArticleMedical science monitor basic research2013
Effect of pheniramine maleate on reperfusion injury in brain tissue.
Article in Medical science monitor basic research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Protective Effects of BPC 157 on Liver, Kidney, and Lung Distant Organ Damage in Rats with Experimental Lower-Extremity Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Effect of pheniramine maleate on rat skeletal muscle ischemia-reperfusion injury.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2022Article
- Renoprotective effect of edaravone in acute limb ischemia/reperfusion injury.Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi · 2019Article
- Role of CtBP2 in the Apoptosis of Retinal Ganglion Cells.Cellular and molecular neurobiology · 2015Article
- Effect of pregabalin in preventing secondary damage in traumatic brain injury: an experimental study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate the protective effects of methylprednisolone (Pn), which is a potent anti-inflammatory agent, and pheniramine maleate (Ph), which is an antihistaminic with some anti-inflammatory effects, on reperfusion injury in brain developing after ischemia of the left lower extremity of rats. MATERIAL AND
methodsTwenty-eight randomly selected male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into 4 groups: Group 1 was the control group, Group 2 was the sham group (I/R), Rats in Group 3 were subjected to I/R and given Ph, and rats in Group 4 were subjected to I/R and given Pn. A tourniquet was applied at the level of left groin region of subjects in the I/R group after induction of anesthesia. One h of ischemia was performed with no drug administration. In the Ph group, half of a total dose of 10 mg/kg Ph was administered intraperitoneally before ischemia and the remaining half before reperfusion. In the Pn group, subjects received a single dose of 50 mg/kg Pn intraperitoneally at the 30th min of ischemia. Brains of all subjects were removed after 24 h for examination.
resultsMalondialdehyde (MDA) levels of the prefrontal cortex were significantly lower in the Ph group than in the I/R group (p<0.05). Superoxide dismutase (SOD) and glutathione peroxidase (GPx) enzyme activities were found to be significantly higher in the Ph group than in the I/R group (p<0.05). Histological examination demonstrated that Ph had protective effects against I/R injury developing in the brain tissue.
conclusionsPh has a protective effect against ischemia/reperfusion injury created experimentally in rat brains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.