Defensive role of Rosmarinus officinalis in carbon tetrachloride-induced nephrotoxicity and oxidative stress in rats

Abstract Background There is a growing demand for remedies from natural sources to substitute synthetic therapeutic drugs and minimize their side effects and toxicity. The present study aims to evaluate the defensive ability of an ethanolic extract of Rosmarinus officinalis L. in carbon tetrachloride (CCl4)-induced nephrotoxicity in male albino rats. Materials and methods Thirty-six rats were divided into 6 groups (n = 6). Group I (control) received distilled water for 30 days orally. Nephrotoxicity was induced by CCl4 (11% v/v with olive oil, i.p) 2 ml/kg body weight (b.wt.) in group II once a week for 30 days. Groups III and IV received the only herb in two doses 100 and 250 mg/kg of b.wt. respectively. Groups V and VI received an ethanolic extract of Rosmarinus officinalis (EERO, 100 and 250 mg/kg of b.wt.) along with 2 ml/kg b.wt. CCl4 weekly for 30 days. Results CCl4 treatment induced highly significant (P < 0.001) elevation in kidney biomarkers, i.e., blood urea nitrogen and creatinine, kidney biochemicals, i.e., LPO and XOD, and decrease the levels of superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione in tissue. However, EERO significantly (P < 0.001) restored the altered levels of these biomarkers in a dose-dependent manner. Furthermore, EERO also prevents histological alteration caused due to the toxicity of CCl4. Conclusion Our findings strongly support that ethanolic extract of Rosmarinus officinalis acts as a potent scavenger of free radicals to prevent the toxic effect of CCl4 and hence validate its ethnomedicinal use

Iopromide for Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pertinent Literature

Background: Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) is an emerging breast imaging modality. Clinical data is scarce. Objectives: To summarize clinical evidence on the use of iopromide in CEM for the detection or by systematically analyzing the available literature on efficacy and safety. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources and methods: Iopromide-specific publications reporting its use in CEM were identified by a systematic search within Bayer’s Product Literature Information (PLI) database and by levering a recent review publication. The literature search in PLI was performed up to January 2023. The confirmatory-supporting review publication was based on a MEDLINE/EMBASE + full text search for publications issued between September 2003 and January 2019. Relevant literature was selected based on pre-defined criteria by 2 reviewers. The comparison of CEM vs traditional mammography (XRM) was performed on published results of sensitivity and specificity. Differences in diagnostic parameters were assessed within a meta-analysis. Results: Literature search: A total of 31 studies were identified reporting data on 5194 patients. Thereof, 19 studies on efficacy and 3 studies on safety. Efficacy: in 11 studies comparing iopromide CEM vs XRM, sensitivity was up to 43% higher (range 1%-43%) for CEM. Differences in specificity were found to be in a range of −4% to 46% for CEM compared with XRM. The overall gain in sensitivity for CEM vs XRM was 7% (95% CI [4%, 11%]) with no statistically significant loss in specificity in any study assessed. In most studies, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were found to be in favor of CEM. In 2 studies comparing CEM with breast magnetic resonance imaging (bMRI), both imaging modalities performed either equally well or CEM tended to show better results with respect to sensitivity and specificity. Safety: eight cases of iopromide-related adverse drug reactions were reported in 1022 patients (0.8%). Conclusions: Pertinent literature provides evidence for clinical utility of iopromide in CEM for the detection or confirmation of breast cancer. The overall gain in sensitivity for iopromide CEM vs XRM was 7% with no statistically significant loss in specificity