论文部分内容阅读
目的:多途径比较单体芍药苷与提取物中芍药苷在大鼠肠道的吸收差异。方法:采用大鼠肠灌流模型同时收集肠灌流液、胆汁及血浆样品,结合肠道酶共孵育试验及表观油水分配系数的测定,多途径综合分析比较单体芍药苷与提取物中芍药苷在大鼠肠道的吸收差异。结果:相同浓度下,不同肠段芍药提取物中芍药苷在大鼠肠道的有效渗透系数Peff*均高于单体芍药苷,尤其是在空肠及回肠肠段(P<0.05),但单体芍药苷及提取物中芍药苷在4个肠段的Peff*均较小(Peff*<0.5),单体芍药苷的Peff*在0.209～0.290,提取物中芍药苷的Peff*在0.252～0.333;提取物及单体的胆汁样品、血浆样品及肠道酶共孵育样品中均未检测到芍药苷及其代谢产物。结论:和单体芍药苷相比提取物中芍药苷在大鼠肠道的吸收有明显提高,表明提取物中可能存在其他促吸收成分,但由于芍药苷总体吸收较差,这种影响在短时间(1～3 h)内并未能提高吸收入血及胆汁中芍药苷的含量。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the absorption differences between paeoniflorin and extract of paeoniflorin in rat intestine through multiple ways. Methods: The intestine perfusate, bile and plasma samples were collected simultaneously by intestine perfusion model. The intestinal enzyme co-incubation test and apparent oil-water partition coefficient were determined. Multiple pathway analysis was used to compare the effects of monomeric paeoniflorin and paeoniflorin Differences in intestinal absorption in rats. Results: At the same concentration, the Peff * of peoniflorin in intestinal tract of Paeonia lactiflora different from intestinal segment was higher than that of monopectone paeoniflorin, especially in jejunum and ileum (P <0.05) Peff * of paeoniflorin and extract of paeoniflorin in four intestines were all smaller (Peff * <0.5), Peff * of monomeric paeoniflorin was 0.209 ~ 0.290, Peff * of paeoniflorin in extract was between 0.252 ~ 0.333; Paeoniflorin and its metabolites were not detected in bile samples, plasma samples and intestinal enzyme co-incubation samples. CONCLUSION: Compared with monomeric paeoniflorin, the absorption of paeoniflorin in rat intestine was significantly increased, indicating that there may be other absorption-promoting components in the extract. However, due to the poor overall absorption of paeoniflorin, the effect is short Time (1 ~ 3 h) did not increase absorption into the blood and bile paeoniflorin content.