Effect of Pycnogenol�� on Noise-Induced Hearing Loss in Rats.

Seher Y��lmaz, Caner Yatmaz, Furkan B��y��kkal, Alev Cumbul, I����lay ��z, Mustafa B��lent ��erbet��io��lu
Author Information
  1. Seher Y��lmaz: Department of Audiology, Ba��kent University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Ankara, T��rkiye. ORCID
  2. Caner Yatmaz: Department of Audiology, ��stanbul Medipol University Graduate School of Health Sciences, ��stanbul, T��rkiye. ORCID
  3. Furkan B��y��kkal: Department of Audiology, ��stanbul Medipol University Graduate School of Health Sciences, ��stanbul, T��rkiye. ORCID
  4. Alev Cumbul: Department of Histology and Embryology, Yeditepe University Faculty of Medicine, ��stanbul, T��rkiye. ORCID
  5. I����lay ��z: Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ba��kent University School of Medicine, Ankara, T��rkiye. ORCID
  6. Mustafa B��lent ��erbet��io��lu: Department of Audiology, ��stanbul Medipol University School of Health Sciences, ��stanbul, T��rkiye. ORCID

Abstract

Background: This study aims to elucidate the potential protective effects of Pycnogenol�� against noise-induced hearing (NIHL) loss in a rat model. Methods: This study employed a randomized controlled design to investigate the potential protective effects of Pycnogenol�� against NIHL in a rat model. Twenty-five male Wistar albino rats were randomly assigned to 5 groups (n=5 per group): a control group receiving saline administration, a noise exposure group, a noise+saline receiving group, only Pycnogenol�� receiving group, and finally, a Pycnogenol�� treatment group receiving daily oral administration of Pycnogenol�� at 40 mg/kg/day via gavage for 7 days following noise exposure. All groups were subjected to auditory brainstem response assessments at 4 time points: pre-exposure (baseline), post-exposure day 1, day 7, and day 21. Both noise exposure and the Pycnogenol�� treatment groups were exposed to 4 kHz narrowband noise at 120 dB SPL for 4 hours. Following sacrifice, histological and immunohistochemical evaluations were conducted on cochlear tissues. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 25 to determine significant differences between groups and across time points. Results: Outcome of this research shows that the auditory brainstem response thresholds and cochlear morphology between the experimental and control groups are significantly different from each other, suggesting that Pycnogenol�� may have the potential to prevent NIHL loss in rats. Conclusion: Pycnogenol�� shows potential in protecting against NIHL. However, further research, particularly at the molecular level, is necessary to better understand its therapeutic mechanisms and its specific impact on auditory metabolic processes.

References

  1. Phytother Res. 2005 Jul;19(7):647-8 [PMID: 16161029]
  2. Exp Neurol. 2013 Jan;239:183-91 [PMID: 23059456]
  3. Panminerva Med. 2010 Jun;52(2 Suppl 1):63-7 [PMID: 20657537]
  4. Chem Biol Interact. 2009 Oct 30;181(3):343-50 [PMID: 19665454]
  5. Arch Med Sci. 2019 Dec 06;18(5):1364-1371 [PMID: 36160362]
  6. Brain Res. 2004 Sep 3;1019(1-2):201-9 [PMID: 15306254]
  7. Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Jun;59(2):111-117 [PMID: 34386797]
  8. Indian J Clin Biochem. 2015 Jan;30(1):11-26 [PMID: 25646037]
  9. Neural Plast. 2014;2014:427298 [PMID: 25028612]
  10. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2021 Jun;28(24):31511-31519 [PMID: 33606165]
  11. Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60 [PMID: 19897823]
  12. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2022 Sep;68(9):1330-1336 [PMID: 36228267]
  13. Front Pharmacol. 2019 Jul 03;10:694 [PMID: 31333448]
  14. J Biochem Mol Toxicol. 2003;17(3):193-9 [PMID: 12815616]
  15. Hear Res. 2017 Jun;349:129-137 [PMID: 27916698]
  16. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Jul;27(81):267-72 [PMID: 26788474]
  17. Exp Mol Med. 2015 Oct 23;47:e191 [PMID: 26492950]
  18. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2019 Sep;31(106):273-279 [PMID: 31598494]
  19. J Int Adv Otol. 2022 Mar;18(2):118-124 [PMID: 35418359]
  20. Phytother Res. 2022 Jun;36(6):2352-2374 [PMID: 35583807]
  21. Neurosci Lett. 2019 Jun 21;704:169-175 [PMID: 30965107]
  22. Hear Res. 2007 Apr;226(1-2):22-43 [PMID: 17141991]
  23. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2019 Sep 2;80(9):525-529 [PMID: 31498679]
  24. J Occup Environ Med. 2018 Sep;60(9):e498-e501 [PMID: 30095587]
  25. Pharm Biol. 2016 Nov;54(11):2777-2781 [PMID: 27158843]
  26. Audiol Neurootol. 2015;20(4):267-72 [PMID: 26111748]
  27. Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91 [PMID: 17695343]
  28. Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Apr 12;25(8): [PMID: 38673858]
  29. Gen Physiol Biophys. 2022 Sep;41(5):473-481 [PMID: 36222345]
  30. Free Radic Biol Med. 1999 Sep;27(5-6):704-24 [PMID: 10490291]
  31. Genetics. 1998 Oct;150(2):815-22 [PMID: 9755211]

MeSH Term

Animals
Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced
Plant Extracts
Flavonoids
Male
Rats, Wistar
Rats
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem
Disease Models, Animal
Cochlea
Random Allocation

Chemicals

Plant Extracts
Flavonoids
pycnogenols

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0Pycnogenol��groupgroupspotentialNIHLreceivingnoiseexposureauditory4daystudyprotectiveeffectslossratmodelratscontroladministrationtreatment7brainstemresponsetimecochlearresearchshowsBackground:aimselucidatenoise-inducedhearingMethods:employedrandomizedcontrolleddesigninvestigateTwenty-fivemaleWistaralbinorandomlyassigned5n=5per:salinenoise+salinefinallydailyoral40mg/kg/dayviagavagedaysfollowingsubjectedassessmentspoints:pre-exposurebaselinepost-exposure121exposedkHznarrowband120dBSPLhoursFollowingsacrificehistologicalimmunohistochemicalevaluationsconductedtissuesStatisticalanalysesperformedusingSPSSsoftwareversion25determinesignificantdifferencesacrosspointsResults:OutcomethresholdsmorphologyexperimentalsignificantlydifferentsuggestingmaypreventConclusion:protectingHoweverparticularlymolecularlevelnecessarybetterunderstandtherapeuticmechanismsspecificimpactmetabolicprocessesEffectNoise-InducedHearingLossRats

Similar Articles

Cited By