Background: Hypertension is a major public health concern worldwide, contributing to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The use of plant-based therapies, such as Euphorbia hirta and Leptadenia hastata, has gained attention for their potential antioxidant, anti-hyperlipidemic, and organ-protective effects.  Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the phytotherapeutic approach to hypertension using E. hirta and L. hastata extracts in adrenaline-induced hypertensive Wistar rats Methods: Utilizing an adrenaline-induced hypertensive rat model, we assessed the effects of E. hirta and L. hastata leaf extracts (50, 100, and 200 mg/kg) on systolic blood pressure, renal function, lipid metabolism, and hematological parameters. Results: Antioxidant activity: Increased levels of superoxide dismutase, catalase, and glutathione peroxidase. Lipid profiles: Reduced levels of total cholesterol, triglycerides, and LDL cholesterol. Liver function tests (LFTs): Decreased levels of alanine transaminase and aspartate transaminase. Hematological parameters: Improved red blood cell count, hemoglobin, and packed cell volume (PCV). Conclusion: This preclinical investigation provides compelling evidence for the antihypertensive potential of E. hirta and L. hastata leaf extracts, validating their traditional use. These findings underscore the promise of these natural products as adjunctive therapeutics for hypertension management, warranting further clinical investigation.

Background and aim: Adrenaline application causes fluctuations in blood pressure. As drugs containing Adrenaline are frequently used in dentistry, the goal of this research was to evaluate blood pressure changes following the injection of anesthetic drugs containing Adrenaline.Materials and Methods: In this case-cross over study, a total number of 150 patients referred to Dental Faculty, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, for tooth extraction in the upper jaw, having no systemic and psychologic disease, were selected. Their blood pressures were recorded before and 15 minutes after injection. The selected patients were randomly assigned in three groups as follows:Group 1: using 1 carpool.Group 2: using 2 carpools.Group 3: using 3 carpools.Results: t-test showed no statistically significant changes in systolic pressure in groups 1 and 2, but it was significant in group 3. Diastolic pressure changes were not statistically significant in all three groups.Conclusion: Using one, two or three carpools of Adrenaline causes slight changes in blood pressure which can be ignored.

Purpose: To compare the effects and complications of lidocaine/adrenaline with Ropivacaine in candidates for upper-lid blepharoplasty. Methods: This study was conducted as a clinical trial. Forty patients with superior upper-lid blepharoplasty following local anesthesia were randomly divided into two groups. In the first group (intervention), ropivacaine and in the second group (control) lidocaine/adrenaline with the same volume as the local anesthetic were used. Then, the pain was measured, using VAS scale and bleeding and edema criteria with a clinical examination. Results: The mean concentration of the required anesthetic drug in the intervention and control groups was 4. 7 ± 0. 4 ml and 4. 8 ± 0. 4 ml (P=0. 445), respectively. In the anesthesia scale analysis, in all time intervals and in both intervention and control groups, the mean VAS of the patients was less than 3 and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P=0. 374). Concerning postoperative edema in the intervention group, there was a significant decrease in swelling around the eyes as compared to the control group (P=0. 015). Conclusion: As a local anesthetic agent in upper-lid blepharoplasty, Ropivacaine reduces pain and the incidence of postoperative edema and does not require the use of adrenaline to control the bleeding time of the surgery. Therefore, it can be used in high-risk surgical patients, for whom the adrenaline is not applicable.

Purpose: To compare the morphology and function of corneal enthothelial cell in early postoperative period after phacoemulsification with infusion or bolus intracameral adrenaline.Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 71 eyes of 71 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to two groups: one group (31 eyes) received bolus intraocular adrenaline at 1/10,000 concentration and the other group (30 eyes) received adrenaline infusion at 1/1,000,000 concentration intraoperatively. Pre- and one month postoperatively, a complete ophthalmologic examination as well as endothelial evaluation with Confucian III was performed. Effective phaco time (EPT) and pupillary condition during the surgery were recorded.Results: Differences between the two groups were not statistically significant in demographic characteristics, lens opacity and EPT. Endothelial cell density was 2737±321 in the bolus group vs 2742±426 in the infusion group preoperatively (P=0.1). After one month, the rate of cell loss was 7.21% in the infusion group and 8.87% in the bolus group (P 0.13). Pupil diameter was >6 mm in 48% of the infusion group vs 33% of the bolus group (P=0.5).Conclusion: Adrenaline was safe at the studied concentrations and there was no significant difference between bolus and infusion routes of administration in terms of effects on pupil and endothelial cells.

Purpose: To compare early postoperative corneal endothelial cell density and morphology after phacoemulsification using bolus versus infusion intracameral adrenaline.Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, 71 eyes of 71 patients scheduled for phacoemulsification were randomly assigned to two groups: one group (31 eyes) received bolus intracameral adrenaline (1:10,000) and the other group (30 eyes) received adrenaline infusion (1:1,000,000). Pre- and one month postoperatively, a complete ophthalmologic examination as well as endothelial evaluation using ConfoScan III was performed; effective phaco time (EPT) and mydriasis during surgery were also compared between the study groups.Results: The two study groups were not significantly different in terms of demographic characteristics, lens opacity and EPT. Endothelial cell density was 2737±321 cell/mm2 in the bolus group vs 2742±426 cell/mm2 in the infusion group preoperatively (P=0.1). One month postoperatively, the rate of cell loss was 7.21% in the infusion group versus 8.87% in the bolus group (P= 0.13). Pupil diameter was >6 mm in 48% of eyes in the infusion group vs 33% of eyes in the bolus group (P=0.5).Conclusion: Adrenaline was safe at the studied concentrations and there was no significant difference between bolus and infusion routes of administration in terms of pupil dilation and endothelial cell loss.