Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33029176›Full record

ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2020

Comparisons of Chemical Profiles and Gastroprotective Effects of Citri Sarcodactylis Fructus Pre- and Poststeam Processing.

Yinji Zhu, Qiuxia Zhang, Ming Gao, Hongfei Wang, Hui He, Jinyu Wang, Kang Chen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yinji ZhuCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Qiuxia ZhangGuangzhou Regenerative Medicine and Health Guangdong Laboratory, Guangzhou 510005, China.
Ming GaoCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Hongfei WangCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Hui HeCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.
Jinyu WangCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4931-1435
Kang ChenCollege of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou 510006, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9975-3085
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNGuangzhou Regenerative Medicine and Health Guangdong Laboratory · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCitri Sarcodactylis Fructus (CSF) is widely used as folk medicine in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The dried and steam-processed CSF (SCSF) has been employed for harmonizing the stomach over thousands of years under the guidelines of TCM theory. However, little is known about the differences in chemical compositions between CSF and SCSF. Moreover, the gastroprotective effects of CSF and SCSF on ethanol-induced gastric mucosal injuries in rats have yet to be investigated. Consequently, the present study aimed to investigate the chemical differences and gastroprotective effects of CSF and SCSF, providing some experimental framework for the development of CSF and SCSF.

methodsThe chemical compositions of CSF and SCSF extracts were determined using an ultra-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometer (UPLC-Q-TOF-MS), and their gastroprotective effects of different doses were assessed in rats with ethanol-induced gastric injuries on the levels of oxidative stress and inflammatory cytokines.

resultsA total of 42 components were identified in CSF and SCSF, and most of them were flavonoids, limonoids, coumarins, and glycosides. There were no differences in the compositions between CSF and SCSF, but the relative contents of the components were different. Among them, nine screened compounds were considered as potential discriminating markers responsible for the differences between CSF and SCSF. Besides, pretreatments with CSF and SCSF markedly improved the gastric mucosal injuries in rats for their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. And SCSF exhibited a better gastroprotective effect than CSF.

conclusionThe compositions of CSF were unchanged after steam-processing, while the relative contents of their components were changed. These changes may be the major reasons for the differentiation of their efficacies. In addition, CSF and SCSF could alleviate ethanol-induced gastric mucosal injury through the enhancement of antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities. SCSF exhibited a better gastroprotective effect than CSF, which emphasized the necessity of steam processing.

Identifiers

PMID33029176
PMCPMC7530479
OpenAlexW3088595083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.