The comparison of the effects of hepatic regeneration after partial hepatectomy, silybum marinaum, propofol, N-acetylcysteine and vitamin E on liver

Abstract

Aim: We investigated the comparison of the effects of N-acetylcysteine, silybum marinaum, propofol, and vitamin E on liver hepatic regeneration after partial hepatectomy.

Method: Forty-eight rats were randomized into 6 different groups of the same age and weight. After partial hepatectomy, all animals were resuscitated with 5 ml of isotonic sodium chloride solution administered subcutaneously while group 1 (sham) did not receive any injection, group 2 (control) received serum physiologic intraperitoneally, group 3 received 25 mg /kg of propofol intraperitoneally, group 4 received 20 mg/kg of N-acetylcysteine intraperitoneally, group 5 received 400 mg/kg of vitamin E intraperitoneally, and group 6 received 10 mg/kg of silybum intraperitoneally. None of these groups were given antibitotics. On the third day, a half of the rats, and on the seventh day, the other half of rats were reoperated and sacrificed.

Results: Blood samples were used for biochemical parameters (AST, ALT). Ki-67 proliferation index was used for histopathologic parameters. A statistically meaningful difference was detected in silybum, vitamin E, N-acetylcysteine, and propofol groups for AST, ALT levels when compared to control and sham groups (p<0.05). Ki-67 regeneration proliferation index of all groups, which were given agents on the third and seventh days were statistically higher than the control and sham groups (p<0.05). During the evaluation, AST, ALT, Ki-67, Ro (regeneration value) levels of silybum group displayed a statistically significant difference according to other groups (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Our experimental study indicates that hepatic regeneration after partial hepatectomy was meaningful and significant in groups with intraperitoneal administration of silybum marinaum,vitamin E, N-acetylcysteine and propofol. Hepatic regeneration rate was particularly higher in silybum group compared to other groups (Fig. 16, Ref. 26).