In recent years, several plant extracts have been examined for their antidiabetic propertics in an effort to identify alternative treatment strategies that pose less of a risk for diabetics. The present study was undertaken to investigate the antidia-betic effects of Syzygium cumini bark in ex-perimental diabetes mellitus. Materials and Methods: Diabetes was induced in male albino Wistar rats by a single intraperito-neal injection of streptozotocin (45 mg/kg body weight), after which, the animals were randomly allocated into five experimental groups as fol-lows: Group 1: normal rats, Group 2: normal rats received Syzygium cumini bark extract (SBEt; 300mg/kg body weight), Group 3: diabetic con-trol rats, Group 4: diabetic rats receiving SBEt (300mg/kg), Group 5: diabetic rats received glibenclamide (600μg/kg body weight). The ef-fects of 45 days treatment of SBEt on blood glu-cose, plasma insulin, C-peptide, urine sugar and body weight were studied in comparison to those of glibenclamide. Results: Blood glucose levels (268.10?19.25 mg/dL) and urine sugar increased significantly whereas the levels of plasma insulin (5.01?0.29 μU/L) and C-peptide (167.68? 8.50 pmol/L) decreased sig-nificantly in diabetic rats as compared to normal rats. Oral administration of SBEt exhibited antidiabetic activity by significantly (p<0.05) lowering blood glucose (84.30?4.25) and urine sugar levels in diabetic rats. Additionally, dia-betic rats treated with SBEt had significantly (p<0.05) elevated levels of plasma insulin (10.29?0.59) and C-peptide (236.50?11.87). During OGTT, long-term administration of SBEt was able to significantly (p<0.05) decrease blood glu-cose concentrations (93.94 ? 3.17; 120min) at vari-ous time intervals when compared to the OGTT pattern of diabetic rats (316.03 ? 18.03). As com-pared to glibenclamide, SBEt has better antidia-betic effects. Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that the antidiabetic activity of SBEt, and both the pancreatic and the extrapancreatic mecha-nisms might be involved such apparent dual ac-tions of SBEt would be more advantageous to the existing oral antidiabetic monotherapy.
Full text is available in PDF