| | Reference | Wound closure analysis | Reepithelialization analysis | Oxidative stress | Granulation tissue fill | Tensile strengths |
| | Bastos et al., 2011 | ? | Fractions A and B: moderated 9 days
Fractions A and B: 100% 15 days | ? | After 15 days in the treated rats, the wound healing process by stimulating different biological events such as network of fibrin, epithelialization, granulation tissue, neovascularization, and wound contraction | ? |
| | Shukla et al., 1999 | ? | ? | Increased:
Superoxide dismutase (35%), catalase (67%), and glutathione peroxidase (49%)
Reduced:
Glutathione (17%) | ? | ? |
| | Muralidhar et al., 2011 | Petroleum ether fraction: (86.83 ± 0.87%) 16 days
Benzene fraction: (86.67 ± 0.67%) 16 days
Chloroform fraction: (88.0 ± 0.57%) 16 days
Acetone fraction: (96.0 ± 0.37%) 16 days
Control: (85.17 ± 0.79%) 16 days | Epithelialization in days
Petroleum ether fraction: 21.17 ± 0.48%
Benzene fraction: 21.67 ± 0.42%
Chloroform fraction: 21.83 ± 0.48%
Acetone fraction: 16.67 ± 0.42%
Control: 22.0 ± 0.37% | ? | Hydroxyproline content (μg/mg)
Petroleum ether fraction: 21.57 ± 0.21
Benzene fraction: 20.96 ± 0.08
Chloroform fraction: 21.84 ± 0.08
Acetone fraction: 23.50 ± 0.17
Control: 21.48 ± 0.17 | Petroleum ether fraction: 155.83 ± 2.26 g
Benzene fraction: 151.0 ± 2.59 g
Chloroform fraction: 163.33 ± 1.33 g
Acetone fraction: 212.83 ± 2.02 g
Control: 147.33 ± 1.23 g |
| | Süntar et al., 2013 | Wound area (mm2) ± SEM (contraction%) in 12 days
Hg-MeOH: 0.96 ± 0.30 (65.71%)
Hg-Hexane: 2.37 ± 0.11 (15.36%)
Hg-CH2Cl2: 2.35 ± 0.29 (16.07%)
Hg-EtOAc: 1.47 ± 0.32 (47.50%)
Hg-BuOH: 1.74 ± 0.48 (37.86%)
Hg-R-H2O: 2.63 ± 0.17 (6.07%)
Hg-Fr.A: 2.20 ± 0.39 (20.29%)
Hg-Fr.B: 1.65 ± 0.09 (40.22%)
Hg-Fr.C: 1.83 ± 0.14 (33.69%)
Control: 2.76 ± 0.30 (6.44%) | Tissues treated with Hg-MeOH, Hg-EtOAc, and Hg-Fr.B demonstrated good wound recovery with faster reepithelialization compared to the other groups tested | ? | Hydroxyproline content (μg/mg)
Hg-MeOH: 26.3 ± 1.0
Hg-Hexane: 18.5 ± 2.1
Hg-CH2Cl2: 19.7 ± 1.9
Hg-EtOAc: 31.2 ± 0.9
Hg-BuOH: 15.6 ± 1.8
Hg-R-H2O: 13.3 ± 1.8
Hg-Fr.A: 15.4 ± 1.2
Hg-Fr.B: 25.5 ± 1.2
Hg-Fr.C: 16.3 ± 1.9
Control: 8.9 ± 2.1 | Hg-MeOH: 30.11%
Hg-Hexane: 17.5%
Hg-CH2Cl2: 15.2%
Hg-EtOAc: 28.5%
Hg-BuOH: 25.8%
Hg-R-H2O: 11.6%
Hg-Fr.A: 13.9%
Hg-Fr.B: 25.2%
Hg-Fr.C: 21.3%
Control: 5.8% |
| | Mekonnen et al. 2013 | Wound contraction in 12 days
Chloroform: xerogel: (77.517 ± 1.88), 5%: (79.91 ± 71.30), and 10%: (82.63 ± 1.74)
Methanol: simple ointment: (86.21 ± 1.5), 5%: (90.86 ± 0.21), and 10%: (92.09 ± 2.00)
Control: (96.63 ± 0.32) | Epithelialization in days
Chloroform: xerogel: (17.83 ± 0.30), 5%: (17.16 ± 0.60), and 10%: (16.83 ± 0.65)
Methanol: simple ointment: (17.33 ± 0.33), 5%: (15.66 ± 0.21), and 10%: (15.33 ± 0.66)
Positive control: (14.00 ± 0.44) | ? | Hydroxyproline content (μg/mg)
Chloroform: xerogel: (3.01 ± 0.46), 5%: (5.83 ± 0.79), and 10%: (7.08 ± 2.08)
Methanol: simple ointment: (3.29 ± 0.66), 5%: (11.01 ± 0.53), and 10%: (15.33 ± 0.66)
Control: (12.57 ± 2.59) | Chloroform: xerogel: 190.83 ± 15.62 g (14.26%), 5%: 238.33 ± 22.86 g (24.89%), and 10%: 265.00 ± 33.04 g (38.86%)
Methanol: simple ointment: 201.50 ± 10.05 g (20.65%), 5%: 322.00 ± 23.63 g (59.80%), and 10%: 336.83 ± 28.39 g (67.16%)
Control: 402.33 ± 30.26 g |
| | Pieters et al., 1995 | PEG ointment: (70%) 15 days
PEG 400 10%: (80%) 15 days
Polyphenolic fraction from dragon’s blood in H2O: (90%) 15 days
Control: (60%) 15 days | PEG ointment: ++ (15 days)
PEG 400 10%: ++ (15 days)
Polyphenolic fraction from dragon’s blood in H2O: ++ (15 days)
Control: + (15 days) | ? | Crust presence
PEG ointment: after 4 days
PEG 400 10%: after 5 days
Polyphenolic fraction from dragon’s blood in H2O: after 1 day
Control: after 3 days | ? |
| | Korkina et al., 2007 | Both verbascoside 56% (46,29 ± 12,21%) 8 days
Both verbascoside 97% (124,29 ± 31,23%) 8 days
Teupolioside 70% (78,39 ± 21,75%) 8 days
Teupolioside 97% (98,45 ± 24,26%) 8 days
Control (150,16 ± 65,46%) 8 days | ? | Lipid peroxidation
Both verbascoside 56% (7,4 ± 0,6%)
Both verbascoside 97% (5,8 ± 0,4%)
Teupolioside 70% (12,0 ± 0,7%)
Teupolioside 97% (9,4 ± 0,6%)
Control: (10,3 ± 1,0)
Glutathione (GST)
Both verbascoside 56% (3,0 ± 1,3%)
Both verbascoside 97% (5,1 ± 1,3%)
Teupolioside 70% (3,4 ± 1,3%)
Teupolioside 97% (5,9 ± 1,2%)
Control: (3,6 ± 1.3%)
Superoxide dismutases
Both verbascoside 56% (2,5 ± 0,1%)
Both verbascoside 97% (2,2 ± 0,1%)
Teupolioside 70% (3,1 ± 0,3%)
Teupolioside 97% (1,0 ± 0,1%)
Control: (4,5 ± 0,5%) | ? | ? |
| | Bigoniya et al., 2013 | EHTF 200 (71,01 ± 4,25%) 16 days
EHTF 400 (69,98 ± 3,34%) 16 days
EHTF 600 (6,02 ± 0,79%) 16 days
Control (71,65 ± 3,21%) 16 days | EHTF 200 (19,66 ± 2,85%)
EHTF 400 (19,50 ± 2,63%)
EHTF 600 (17,50 ± 1,56%)
Control (21,50 ± 1,22%) | Vehicle control: catalase (0,46 ± 0,02%); SOD (1,15 ± 0,12%), and total protein (2,60 ± 0,06%)
EHTF 200: catalase (0,45 ± 0,03%), SOD (1,16 ± 0,06%), and total protein (2,69 ± 0,07%)
EHTF 400: catalase (0,52 ± 0,09%), SOD (2,63 ± 0,15%), and total protein (3,34 ± 0,05%)
EHTF 600: catalase (0,75 ± 0,19%), SOD (5,06 ± 0,09%), and total protein (4,02 ± 0,03%) | Hydroxyproline content
EHTF 200 (15,89 ± 1,28%)
EHTF 400 (17,89 ± 2,26%)
EHTF 600 (24,14 ± 2,23%)
Control (16,09 ± 1,35%) | ? |
| | Lodhi et al., 2011 | MAF A (100,00%) 20 days
MAF B (100,00%) 20 days
MAF C (100,00%) 18 days
Control (90,37 ± 2,07%) 20 days | MAF A and B (20 days)
MAF C (18 days)
Control (24 days) | ? | Hydroxyproline content:
MAF A (37,11 ± 1,25%)
MAF B (32,86 ± 0,85%)
MAF C (42,01 ± 0,82%)
Control (21,74 ± 1,85%)
Protein content
MAF A (56,30 ± 0,55%)
MAF B (52,50 ± 1,70%)
MAF C (83,60 ± 0,72%)
Control (47,30 ± 1,72%) | MAF A (603,00 ± 12,01%)
MAF B (635,00 ± 9,68%)
MAF C (850,00 ± 11,89%)
Control (423,00 ± 10,96%) |
| | Tabandeh et al., 2013 | Silibinin 10%: 100% (18 days)
Silibinin 20%: 100% (22 days)
Control: 100% (26 days) | ? | ? | Content N-acetyl glucosamine and n-acetyl galactosamine: silibinin 10 and 20% ↑ compared with the control groups at days 10, 20, and 30
Hydroxyproline and collagen content: silibinin 10 and 20% ↑ compared with the control groups at days 10, 20, and 30 | ? |
| | Sonmez et al., 2015 | Absorbable polysaccharide haemostat (APH): (94.74 ± 0.02%) 14 days
Control: 87.33 ± 0.02% 14 days | ? | ? | Type 1 collagen
APH: 4.25
Control: 3.25
Fibroblast density
APH: 2.87
Control: 1.75 | ? |
| | Karakaş et al., 2012 | HOT: (80%) 30 days
HOTBp: (100%) 30 days
Control: (80%) 30 days | ? | ? | HOT: ↑ fibroblastic and lymphocytes: 5 days
HOTBp: ↑ fibroblastic and lymphocytes: 5 days
Control: ↑ fibroblastic and lymphocytes: 5 days
HOT: ↑ collagen fibrils: 10 days
HOTBp: ↑ collagen fibrils: 10 days
Control: ↑ collagen fibrils: 10 days | ? |
| | Choi et al., 2001 | G1G1M1DI2: (98,9%) 8 days
Control: (69,5%) 8 days | Epithelialization in 8 days
G1G1M1DI2: 98,9%
Control: 69,5% | ? | EGF receptor
G1G1M1DL2 0,5%: (113%)
G1G1M1DL2 50%: (220 ± 8%)
Control: 100%
Fibronectin
G1G1M1DL2 0,5%: (294 ± 34%)
G1G1M1DL2 50%: (408 ± 80%)
Control: 100%
Fibronectin receptor
G1G1M1DL2 0,5%: (159 ± 11%)
G1G1M1DL2 50%: (220 ± 19%)
Control: 100% | ? |
| | Parente et al., 2011 | ? | ? | ? | Number of blood vessels
HCF 1 (0/4)
DCF 2 (0/13)
Control 2 (0/13)
Days 4 and 7: presence of fibrin in both groups | ? |
| | Olugbuyiro et al., 2010 | Flabellaria paniculata
Chloroform fraction: 0.0 (100%) 14 days
Aqueous fraction: 25.0 ± 3.0% (71.4%) 14 days
Control: 87.5 ± 7.5% | Flabellaria paniculata on noninfected rat wounds
Chloroform fraction: (14.0 ± 0.0%)
Aqueous fraction: (21.5 ± 0.5%)
Control: (24.5 ± 0.5%) | ? | ? | ? |
| | Süntar et al., 2010 | mm2 (%)
Fr.A: 1.60 ± 1.53 (44.4%)
Fr.B: 1.59 ± 0.11 (44.8%)
Fr.C: 0.99 ± 0.31 (65.6%)
Fr.D: 0.77 ± 0.03 (73.3%)
Fr.E: 1.98 ± 0.63 (31.3%)
Control: 2.88 ± 0.72 (17.5%) | ? | ? | ? | mm2 (%)
Fr.A: 21.52 ± 1.15 (13.9%)
Fr.B: 24.97 ± 3.18 (32.3%)
Fr.C: 25.63 ± 1.43 (35.8%)
Fr.D: 26.61 ± 2.05 (40.9%)
Fr.E: 22.95 ± 2.73 (21.6%)
Control: 18.88 ± 2.67 (16.3%) |
| | Kim et al., 2013 | The ginsenoside Rd-treated wounds were significantly smaller than the wounds treated with control Matrigel on days 6 and 9 | ? | ? | Ginsenoside Rd ↑ proliferation and migration fibroblasts; ginsenoside Rd at 0.1–10 mM ↑ collagen type I protein and ↓ MMP-1 protein in fibroblasts | ? |
| | Chaudhari et al., 2006 | ? | Fraction I: 9 days
Fraction II: 23 days
Fraction III: 20 days | ? | Fraction I increase in hexosamine
Fractions II and III did not reveal increase in the hexosamine content of granulation tissue | Fraction I: 719.33 g ± 0.88
Fraction II: 572.33 g ± 2.46
Fraction III: 590.33 g ± 1.87 |
| | Swamy et al., 2006 | Embelin: (98.50% ± 1.64) 16 days
Control: (85.33% ± 3.66) 16 days | Epithelialization in days
Embelin: 18.17 ± 1.47
Control: 20.33 ± 2.66 | ? | Granulation tissue showed complete healing with more fibroblasts, collagen, and increased number of blood vessels | Embelin: 528.00 g ± 15.85
Control: 374.67 g ± 5564 |
| | Hernandes et al., 2010 | The 1% ethyl-acetate fraction from Stryphnodendron adstringens did not influence wound contraction | No difference in the length of newly formed epithelium was found between the treated and control wounds | ? | ? | ? |
|
|
| | Reference | Wound closure analysis | Reepithelialization analysis | Oxidative stress | Granulation tissue fill | Tensile strengths |
| | Sidhu et al., 1999 | Arnebin-1 reduced wound width wounds compared with control | Arnebin-1: 7 days
Control: only epithelial migration over the dermis | ? | The organization of the granulation tissue was more advanced in arnebin-1-treated wounds with thick bundles of well-aligned collagen compared with controls | ? |
| | Paramesha et al., 2015 | Dehydroabietylamine: (97.78% ± 2.15) 16 days
Control: (82.92% ± 1.83) 16 days | Epithelialization in days
Dehydroabietylamine: 17.67 ± 2.62
Control: 23.17 ± 1.14 | ? | Hydroxyproline content (µg/100 g)
Dehydroabietylamine: 2106,50 ± 2,62
Control: 1369,67 ± 10,54 | Dehydroabietylamine: 425.67 g ± 10.03
Control: 277.00 g ± 9.39 |
| | Nagappan et al., 2012 | Mahanine and mahanimbicine: (88.5% ± 2.03 to 93% ± 2.04) 16 days
Control: (82.7% ± 2.13) 16 days | Mahanine and mahanimbicine: 18 days
Control: 18 days | ? | Collagen deposition
Mahanine and mahanimbicine:
(65.63% ± 0.87 to 67.76% ± 0.85) 21 days and
(81.56% ± 1.04 to 88.54% ± 1.34) 28 days
Control: (61.84% ± 0.94) 21 days and
(78.06% ± 1.22) 28 days | ? |
| | Qu et al., 2013 | Compound I to compound VII: (96.8% ± 1.9 to 87.0% ± 2.6) 16 days
Control: (87.2% ± 3.1) 16 days | Compound I and compound V: 18 days
Control and other groups: 22 days | ? | Hydroxyproline content (mg/g tissue)
Compound I to compound VII:
58.4 ± 3.7 to 80.3 ± 4.4
Control: 60.2 ± 4.1 | Compound I to compound VII: 431.5 g ± 8.3 to 547.3 g ± 7.9
Control: 436.5 g ± 7.6 |
| | Ghosh et al., 2012 | Compound I to compound II: (100%) 18 days
Control: (100%) 22 days | Compound I: 17.16 ± 0.4 days
Compound II: 17.25 ± 0.25 days
Control: 22.00 ± 0.1 days | ? | Compounds I and II: fibrous connective tissue with strong collagenation
Control: fibrosis and more aggregation of macrophages with less collagen fibers | Compound I: 565.10 g ± 3.1
Compound II: 561.12 g ± 3.9
Control: 372.13 g ± 3.23 |
| | Mukherjee et al., 2013 | Compound I (2,5%): (89.91% ± 0.55) 18 days
Compound II (2,5%): (97.89% ± 0.77) 18 days
Control: (75.44% ± 0.37) 18 days | Compound I (2,5%): 17.16 ± 0.4 days
Compound II (2,5%): 16.01 ± 0.33 days
Control: 21.00 ± 0.11 days | ? | Hydroxyproline content (mg/g tissue)
Compound I (2,5%): 158.23 ± 0.44
Compound II (2,5%): 198.16 ± 0.33
Control: 151.9 ± 2.69 | Compound I (2,5%): 538.00 g ± 1.89
Compound II (2,5%): 535.12 g ± 3.59
Control: 322.39 g ± 2.66 |
| | Melo et al., 2011 | Cramoll 1,4: (100%) 10 days
Control: (100%) 12 days | ? | ? | Crust presence: cramoll 1,4: 13.1 ± 7.02
Control: 5.4 ± 3.3
Collagen presence: cramoll 1,4: (higher collagen deposition and annex sprouts) 12 days
Control: (matrix poor in collagen fibers) 12 days | ? |
| | Pieters et al., 1995 | 3′,4-0-Dimethylcedrusin: (85%) 15 days
Taspine: (75%) 15 days
Control: (60%) 15 days | 3′,4-0-Dimethylcedrusin: ++ (15 days)
Taspine: + (15 days)
Control: + (15 days) | ? | Crust presence
3′,4-0-Dimethylcedrusin: after 5 days
Taspine: after 5 days
Control: after 3 days | ? |
| | Ahamed et al., 2009 | Gulonic acid γ-lactone: (94.02% ± 0.20) 16 days
Control: (79.53% ± 0.97) 16 days | Epithelialization in days
Gulonic acid γ-lactone: 18.62 ± 0.21
Control: 22.59 ± 0.15 | ? | Hydroxyproline content (µg/100 g)
Gulonic acid γ-lactone: 780.48 ± 50.73
Control: 346.15 ± 14.54
Fibroblast count/high power field × 400
Gulonic acid γ-lactone: 53.26 ± 2.37
Control: 97.53 ± 4.26
Blood vessel count/high power field × 400
Gulonic acid γ-lactone: 21.94 ± 1.15
Control: 11.63 ± 1.11 | Gulonic acid γ-lactone: 561.12 g ± 5.18
Control: 327.63 g ± 6.37 |
| | Zyuz’kov et al., 2012 | Songorine: 100% (9–16 days)
Napelline: 100% (9–16 days)
Hypaconitine: 100% (9–16 days)
12-Epinapelline N-oxide: 89.93% ± 5.53 (9–16 days)
Mesaconitine: 97.8% ± 2.2 (9–16 days)
Control: 89.72% ± 4.72 (9–16 days) | Songorine-napelline-hypaconitine
Newly formed epithelium by the wound edges represented a cell layer of varying thickness without vertical anisomorphism: 5 days | ? | Leukocytic infiltration
Songorine: reduction (3 days)
Napelline: reduction (3 days)
Hypaconitine: reduction (3 days)
12-Epinapelline N-oxide: ?/mesaconitine: ?/control: ?
Counts of fibroblasts
Songorine: increased (3 days)
Napelline: increased (3 days)
Hypaconitine: increased (3 days)
12-Epinapelline N-oxide: ?/mesaconitine: ?/control: ? | ? |
| | Singh et al., 2005 | Deoxyelephantopin: 98.8% ± 0.35 (16 days)
Control: 85.8% ± 0.69 (16 days) | Epithelialization in days
Deoxyelephantopin: 14.0 ± 0.26
Control: 20.0 ± 0.86 | ? | Deoxyelephantopin: ↓ macrophages and ↑ collagen formation
Control: ↑ macrophages and ↓ collagen formation | Deoxyelephantopin: 412.0 g ± 11.37
Control: 298.6 g ± 8.48 |
| | Sharath et al., 2010 | Bacoside-A: 98.18% ± 0.05 (16 days)
Control: 85.22% ± 0.02 (16 days) | Epithelialization in days
Bacoside-A: 18.30 ± 0.01
Control: 20.20 ± 0.04 | ? | Bacoside-A: ↑ blood vessels and ↑ collagen formation
Control: ↑ inflammatory cells, ↓ blood vessels, and ↓ collagen formation | Bacoside-A: 538.47 g ± 0.14
Control: 380.48 g ± 0.11 |
| | Vidya et al., 2012 | Entadamide: 92.22% ± 0.05 (16 days)
Phaseoloidin: 88.50 ± 0.10 (16 days)
Entagenic acid: 96.08% ± 0.04 (16 days)
Control: 83.31% ± 1.06 (16 days) | Epithelialization in days
Entadamide: 19.92 ± 0.01
Phaseoloidin: 21.16 ± 0.02
Entagenic acid: 18.08 ± 0.01
Control: 24.00 ± 0 | ? | Hydroxyproline content (µg/100 g)
Entadamide: 1891.17 ± 2.75
Phaseoloidin: 1690.33 ± 2.80
Entagenic acid: 2001.33 ± 3.53
Control: 1369.67 ± 10.54 | Entadamide: 463.33 g ± 4.48
Phaseoloidin: 450.17 g ± 7.55
Entagenic acid: 549.83 g ± 2.21
Control: 260.83 g ± 14.05 |
|
|
