Animal study on primary dysmenorrhoea treatment at different administration times

Abstract

The new methods of different administration times for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea are more widely used clinically; however, no obvious mechanism has been reported. Therefore, an animal model which is closer to clinical evaluation is indispensable. A novel animal experiment with different administration times, based on the mice oestrous cycle, for primary dysmenorrhoea treatment was explored in this study. Mice were randomly divided into two parts (one-cycle and three-cycle part) and each part includes five groups (12 mice per group), namely, Jingqian Zhitong Fang (JQF) 6-day group, JQF last 3-day group, Yuanhu Zhitong tablet group, model control group, and normal control group. According to the one-way ANOVAs, results (writhing reaction, and PGF2α , PGE2, NO, and calcium ions analysis by ELISA) of the JQF cycle group were in accordance with those of JQF last 3-day group. Similarly, results of three-cycle continuous administration were consistent with those of one-cycle treatment. In conclusion, the consistency of the experimental results illustrated that the novel animal model based on mice oestrous cycle with different administration times is more reasonable and feasible and can be used to explore in-depth mechanism of drugs for the treatment of primary dysmenorrhoea in future.

Figure 1

The experimental scheme. The entire experiments were departed into two parts to investigate the efficiency of treatment for one and three cycles. In each treatment cycle, mice were randomized into five groups, namely, JQF cycle group (6 d group), JQF last 3 d group (3 d group), Yuanhu Zhitong tablet group (Yuanhu group), model control group, and normal control group.

Figure 2

Mice typical vaginal smear of different stages of the oestrous cycle (200x). (a) Proestrus smear; (b) estrus smear; (c) metestrus smear; (d) diestrus smear.

Figure 3

Effects of different administration times on oxytocin-induced dysmenorrhoea mice model. Values are means ± SD (n = 12) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups; Yuanhu group versus model control group.

Figure 4

Effects of PGF_2α at different administration times on dysmenorrhoea mice. Values are means ± SD (n = 6) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups; Yuanhu group versus model control group.

Figure 5

Effects of PGE₂ at different administration times on dysmenorrhoea mice. Values are means ± SD (n = 6) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups versus model control group; Yuanhu group versus model control group in one cycle ^* P < 0.05 and three cycles ^** P < 0.01.

Figure 6

Effects of PGF_2α and PGE₂ ratio at different administration times on dysmenorrhoea mice. Values are means ± SD (n = 6) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups versus model control group; Yuanhu Zhitong tablet group versus model control group only in three cycles ^** P < 0.01.

Figure 7

Effects of NO at different administration times on dysmenorrhoea mice. Values are means ± SD (n = 6) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups versus model control group; Yuanhu group versus model control group only in three cycles ^* P < 0.05.

Figure 8

Effects of calcium ions at different administration times on dysmenorrhoea mice. Values are means ± SD (n = 6) and significant difference compared with control group; ^## P < 0.01, model control group versus normal control group; ^** P < 0.01, 6 d and 3 d groups; Yuanhu group versus model control group.