PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Propolis”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Propolis allergy (IV). Studies with further sensitizers from propolis and constituents common to propolis, poplar buds and balsam of Peru.

26 different compounds have been investigated experimentally for their sensitizing capacity in guinea pigs. 19 of these occur in propolis as well as in poplar bud exudates, and 14 of them are also found in balsam of Peru. 4 caffeates and benzyl isoferulate were found to be strong sensitizers. 7 compounds were moderate, and 13 compounds showed only weak sensitizing potency. Methyl cinnamate was negative. Patch tests in 11 propolis-sensitive patients once more revealed 3-methyl-2-butenyl caffeate and phenylethyl caffeate as the major sensitizers. In addition to the 8 compounds already known to occur in propolis as well as in balsam of Peru, we detected 5 further substances that both materials have in common. Among these, benzyl isoferulate is considered a noteworthy sensitizer. Coniferyl benzoate, which was shown to be a moderate sensitizer, is present in fresh samples of balsam of Peru, while in propolis it has been detected only once so far. The flavonoid aglycones occurring in poplar bud exudates, and hence also in propolis, are weak sensitizers which play only a minor role in propolis hypersensitivity.

Allergens↗
PubMed1979

[On the antimicrobial activity of propolis and propolis constituents (author's transl)].

After a survey of the literature on the antimicrobial activity of the bee product propolis, the authors discuss their own findings as compared to the chemotherapeutical agents streptomycin, oxytetracycline, chloramphenicol, nystatin, griseofulvin and sulphamerazine. According to the results obtained by testing 25 isolated constituents on Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aureus, Candida albicans and Trichophyton mentagrophytes, the antimicrobial properties of this mixture of natural substances are mainly attributable to the flavonoids pinocembrin, galangin, pinobanksin, pinobanksin-3-acetate as well as to the p-coumaric acid benzyl ester and a caffeic acid ester mixture. None of the isolated substances was as potent as the antibiotics tested for the purpose of comparison. The relatively good antimycetic activity of the 5,7-dihydroxyflavanone pinocembrin seems noteworthy. Finally, possible mechanisms of the antimicrobial action of the flavonoids are discussed.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1977

Biological properties and clinical application of propolis. I. Some physico-chemical properties of propolis.

The presence of 19 elements has been shown in the ethanol extracts of propolis (EEP). Three fractions have been obtained by filtration through a structural gel that did not show an initial antibacterial activity when investigated separately. Fractions 2 and 3 joined together have regained this activity. EEP solutions maintain their anitbacterial activity in acidic or neutral pH. Insensitivity of EEP solutions on temperautre of 75 degrees C for 30 min has been found.

Bees↗
PubMed1977

Biological properties and clinical application of propolis. III. Investigation of the sensitivity of Staphylococci isolated from pathological cases to ethanol extract of propolis (EEP). Attempts on inducing resistance in laboratory Staphylococcus strain to EEP.

Staphylococci isolated from pathological material exhibited a reduced sensitivity to ethanol extract of propolis (EEP) in 90% of cases. No cross-resistance of the staphylococci to EEP and to any commonly used antibiotics was found. The induction of resistance to EEP in laboratory strain of Staphylococcus aureus (Oxford 209 P) can be achieved already after serial passages on nutrient media containing EEP. Culturing Staphylococcus resistant to EEP in an environment devoid of this compound caused a remission to sensitivity of the strain investigated.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1977

Biological properties and clinical application of propolis. IV. The action of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP) on cells cultured in vitro.

An increase of total cell number was shown in the cell culture in vitro under the influence of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP). Addition of EEP to the nutrient medium of the cells caused a strong activation of mitoses. Besides, distinctly intensified metabolism of these cells expressed by a strong activation of NADH2-reductase was also observed.

Cells, Cultured↗
PubMed1978

Biological properties and clinical application of propolis. X. Preliminary pharmacological evaluation of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP).

A study consisting of an examination of the acute toxicity of ethanol extract of propolis (EEP) in mice, its effect on spontaneous movement in mice and rats, its analgesic properties and its influence on body temperature in mice was conducted. Also examined was the activity of EEP on animals under the influence of narcotics and spontaneous movement under the influence of amphetamine, its effects on blood pressure and respiration in rats. The results of these examinations indicate that EEP injected i.p. has a weak general effect on the experimental animals.

Amphetamine↗
PubMed1977

[Selective effect of propolis in the isolation of Listeria monocytogenes (author's transl)].

Propolis is a substance produced by honeybees. It is inhibitory to some bacteria species, mainly Gram-positive bacteria, but less inhibitory to Listeria monocytogenes (L.m) than to the other Gram-positive bacteria tested. In order to obtain selective growth of L.m. from contaminated samples, the effect of propolis in plating media and broths on various strains of bacteria was examined. Table I shows the effect of increasing concentrations of propolis in tryptose-agar (TA). L.m. tolerated higher concentrations of propolis than Streptococcus viridans and Staphylococcus aureus. L.m. grew well in tryptosebroth (TB) that contained 0.15 mg propolis pr. ml medium, while Streptococcus viridans and Streptococcus agalactiae were completely inhibited as seen in Table II. Table III shows that when serum was added to the agar, the inhibitory effect was reduced. It can also be seen that Gram-negative bacteria grew quite well on media that contained 0.19 mg propolis pr. ml. To reduce the growth of Gram-negative bacteria, nalidixic acid was added to the medium. Table IV illustrates growth of various species of bacteria in tryptosephosphatebroth (TFB) with or without propolis and nalidixic acid. Most of the strains tested were inhibited, but Pseudomonas aeruginosa and to some extent faecal streptococci were able to grow in the medium that contained the selective substances. As a conclusion it seems that propolis may be a valuable additive to a medium for the selective isolation of L.m.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1991

Effects of propolis on dental caries in rats.

Propolis, the resinous hive product collected by bees, is important in the defense of the hive. The effects of propolis on growth and glucosyltransferase activity of Streptococcus sobrinus 6715, Streptococcus mutans PS14 and Streptococcus cricetus OMZ61 in vitro, and on dental caries in rats infected with S. sobrinus 6715 were investigated. Propolis had antimicrobial activity against S. sobrinus, S. mutans and S. cricetus, and inhibited both water-insoluble glucan synthesis and glucosyltransferase activity. In rats inoculated with S. sobrinus, about half of their fissures were carious, while dental caries was significantly less (p = 0.01) in rats given propolis. Dental caries was markedly decreased by the multiple actions of propolis which had antimicrobial activity, inhibited water-insoluble glucan synthesis, and inhibited glucosyltransferase activity. No toxic effects of propolis on the growth of rats were observed under experimental conditions in this study. These results suggest that propolis can control dental caries in the rat model system.

Animals↗
PubMed1976

Contact dermatitis from propolis.

Two patients with contact dermatitis due to the natural product propolis (bee glue) are reported. They presented perioral eczema and stomatitis which were recalcitrant until propolis was considered as the cause. Patch tests with propolis preparations were positive in both patients, and, furthermore, in the second patient the lesions relapsed after provocation tests. European standard patch test including balsam of Peru were negative. The complexity of propolis, its supposed anti-inflammatory effect due to flavonoids, and the sensitizing agents originating mainly from the poplar trees are discussed together with the cross-sensitization to balsam of Peru. Contact dermatitis due to propolis should be considered in unexplained eczemas, mainly perioral but also in other areas, as propolis preparations are available also as ointments and cosmetic creams.

Aged↗
PubMed1987

Propolis allergy. (I). Origin, properties, usage and literature review.

Propolis or bee-glue, a resinous bee-hive product, is the cause of an increasing number of cases of allergic contact dermatitis. Formerly only observed in bee-keepers, propolis allergy today is mainly seen in individuals who use propolis in bio-cosmetics and self treatment of various diseases. Nearly 200 cases are summarized in an overview, including the first description of 'poplar bud' contact dermatitis from 1887. As practically all flavonoid aglycones and most of the other phenolics present in propolis are identical with the bud secretion of poplars, evidence is given that the poplar bud constituents are responsible for propolis hypersensitivity.

Cosmetics↗
PubMed1987

Propolis allergy. (II). The sensitizing properties of 1,1-dimethylallyl caffeic acid ester.

As shown in the preceding paper, propolis or bee-glue is the cause of an increasing number of allergic reactions in persons using it in external preparations and cosmetics. Propolis and its main contact allergen, 1,1-dimethylallyl caffeic acid ester, designated LB-1, show strong sensitizing properties in patients as well as in guinea pig experiments. 9 patients have been patch tested with this compound, 8 of whom reacted strongly. Chemical separation of different propolis samples and poplar bud extracts reveal that LB-1 is always present. Poplar bud secretion is the bee's major source for propolis and hence the origin of LB-1. A warning is indicated, in agreement with several other authors, that propolis should not be used in topical products because of its strong sensitizing properties.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

[Propolis allergy].

The incidence of propolis contact sensitivity was 1.2-3.3% among 7483 hospital patients during the period 1981-1987, while the prevalence among 1,558 healthy volunteers was 0.64%. A group of 26 patients with contact allergy to propolis was challenged with identified substances isolated from propolis. The mixture of 3-methyl-2-butenylester (3M2B) and 3-methyl-3-butenylester (3M3B) from caffeic acid caused a positive reaction in 7 patients, and in 5 of 9 patients there was a positive reaction to the mixture of 3M2B and 3M3B from diacetyl-caffeic acid. Among the 19 patients challenged with the flavonoid group, 3 had positive reactions, and individual derivatives of cinnamic acid caused positive reactions in 3 and 4 patients each. When five components taken from poplar buds were tested, the one that provoked the largest number of positive reactions was the methanol component (15 of 19 patients). The results show that propolis contact allergy is not caused by one main allergen, but by several allergens varying in chemical composition; the presence of these in propolis depends on the nature of the source plant and the place and time of collection by the bees.

Adult↗