Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 29;2021:6026319. doi: 10.1155/2021/6026319

Table 2.

Effects of HXQYF against oxidative stress in NAFLD rats.

Groups Dose (mg·kg−1) SOD (U/mL) GSH (μmol/g prot) CAT (U/mg prot) MDA (nmol/mg prot) HO-1 (U/L)
Normal 88.00 ± 7.92 25.11 ± 4.92 192.04 ± 61.53 17.66 ± 6.73 38.77 ± 2.99
HFD 72.03 ± 8.90## 17.72 ± 6.58## 151.32 ± 24.22# 26.06 ± 5.26## 43.19 ± 1.54##
HXQYF 22.5 79.85 ± 8.87 19.06 ± 2.69 176.39 ± 32.23 13.73 ± 4.05∗∗ 42.73 ± 1.24
45 83.18 ± 7.35∗∗ 22.23 ± 3.95 216.60 ± 44.79∗∗ 12.79 ± 2.43∗∗ 44.24 ± 3.53
90 80.99 ± 11.13 24.53 ± 4.63∗∗ 228.27 ± 43.80∗∗ 16.30 ± 6.32∗∗ 46.09 ± 3.23
ESS 136.8 71.28 ± 10.62 20.52 ± 2.82 240.84 ± 32.11∗∗ 15.18 ± 4.30∗∗ 42.79 ± 2.66

The NAFLD rats were administered with the HXQYF (22.5, 45, 90 mg/kg). ESS was adopted as a positive control for comparison. After 18 weeks of treatment, superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione (GSH), catalase (CAT), monochrome display adapter (MDA), and Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) were detected. Values given are in means ± SD, with n = 10. #P < 0.05 and ##P < 0.01 versus normal. P < 0.05 and ∗∗P < 0.01 versus HFD. Statistically significant differences were determined using one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett's multiple comparisons test or post hoc analysis.