EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF WOUND HEALING ACTIVITY OF AYURVEDIC ANTIMICROBIAL FORMULATIONS USING IN VIVO ANIMAL EXCISION AND INCISION METHODS

M. Gupta, S. Majumdar, Suchetana Banerjee, A. Dey, S. Sengupta
{"title":"EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION OF WOUND HEALING ACTIVITY OF AYURVEDIC ANTIMICROBIAL FORMULATIONS USING IN VIVO ANIMAL EXCISION AND INCISION METHODS","authors":"M. Gupta, S. Majumdar, Suchetana Banerjee, A. Dey, S. Sengupta","doi":"10.7897/2230-8407.111196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wound healing comprises of four phases, namely inflammation, proliferation, re-epithelialization and remodelling which re-establish integrity of damaged tissue. This experimental study evaluates wound healing action of two Ayurvedic stem bark formulations, RFNA (containing Neem & Ashoka) and RFUL (containing Udumber & Lodhra) using 5% & 10% aqueous extract concentrations for preparation of ointment for external wound application using excision and incision methods. Phytochemical screening of extracts indicated presence of alkaloids, flavonoids, tannins and carbohydrates while total flavonoid content was 54.76 and 59.14 µg QE/mg and total phenol content was 205.00 and 225.67 µg GAE/mg for RFNA and RFUL. This 14-day study used Swiss albino rats divided into six groups, each group having six animals. While Group A was control group, Group B used Framycetin Sulphate IP as standard drug. Groups C, D, E and F were administered ointment containing 5% and 10% RFNA and RFUL respectively. While excision wound model study evaluated the percentage of wound contraction and amount of pus formation, the incision wound model assessed reduction in wound length and histopathological microscopic examination of wound skin, on the 4th, 7th and 14th day. During this study, 10% RFNA and RFUL exhibited similar therapeutic efficacy as standard drug while 5% concentrations showed a little lower but highly significant properties, possibly due to high concentration of phenolic and flavonoidic compounds. The results showed that highest therapeutic efficacy was shown by 10% RFNA followed by 10% RFUL, 5% RFNA and 5% RFUL groups respectively in both excision and incision models.","PeriodicalId":14413,"journal":{"name":"International Research Journal Of Pharmacy","volume":"5 1","pages":"41-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Research Journal Of Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7897/2230-8407.111196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Wound healing comprises of four phases, namely inflammation, proliferation, re-epithelialization and remodelling which re-establish integrity of damaged tissue. This experimental study evaluates wound healing action of two Ayurvedic stem bark formulations, RFNA (containing Neem & Ashoka) and RFUL (containing Udumber & Lodhra) using 5% & 10% aqueous extract concentrations for preparation of ointment for external wound application using excision and incision methods. Phytochemical screening of extracts indicated presence of alkaloids, flavonoids, tannins and carbohydrates while total flavonoid content was 54.76 and 59.14 µg QE/mg and total phenol content was 205.00 and 225.67 µg GAE/mg for RFNA and RFUL. This 14-day study used Swiss albino rats divided into six groups, each group having six animals. While Group A was control group, Group B used Framycetin Sulphate IP as standard drug. Groups C, D, E and F were administered ointment containing 5% and 10% RFNA and RFUL respectively. While excision wound model study evaluated the percentage of wound contraction and amount of pus formation, the incision wound model assessed reduction in wound length and histopathological microscopic examination of wound skin, on the 4th, 7th and 14th day. During this study, 10% RFNA and RFUL exhibited similar therapeutic efficacy as standard drug while 5% concentrations showed a little lower but highly significant properties, possibly due to high concentration of phenolic and flavonoidic compounds. The results showed that highest therapeutic efficacy was shown by 10% RFNA followed by 10% RFUL, 5% RFNA and 5% RFUL groups respectively in both excision and incision models.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用动物活体切除和切口方法对阿育吠陀抗菌制剂伤口愈合活性的实验评估
伤口愈合包括四个阶段,即炎症、增殖、再上皮化和重建,重建受损组织的完整性。本实验研究评估了两种阿育吠陀茎皮配方的伤口愈合作用,RFNA(含有印度楝树和阿育花)和RFUL(含有乌杜姆和罗陀拉)使用5%和10%的水提取物浓度制备用于切除和切口方法的外部伤口应用的软膏。植物化学筛选结果表明,提取液中含有生物碱、黄酮类、单宁类和碳水化合物,总黄酮含量分别为54.76和59.14µg QE/mg,总酚含量分别为205.00和225.67µg GAE/mg。这项为期14天的研究将瑞士白化大鼠分为六组,每组有六只动物。A组为对照组,B组以硫酸框架霉素IP为标准药物。C、D、E、F组分别给予含5%、10% RFNA和RFUL的软膏。切除创面模型在第4、7、14天评估创面收缩率和脓量,切口创面模型评估创面长度缩小率和创面皮肤组织病理显微镜检查。在本研究中,10%的RFNA和RFUL表现出与标准药物相似的治疗效果,而5%浓度的RFUL表现出略低但非常显著的疗效,可能是由于高浓度的酚类和类黄酮化合物。结果显示,在切除和切口模型中,10% RFNA组疗效最高,其次是10% RFUL组、5% RFNA组和5% RFUL组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chromotag application in quantification of alogliptin Inhibition of α-glucosidase activity by polyphenol compounds from C. occidentalis: Phytochemical screening and antidiabetic studies A. Chemistry Corrosion potential of reinforced EDTA Zn-Fe Alloy in Acidic and Basic medium. Assessment of Thiruvarur region groundwater samples using Physicochemical parameters The vast scientific vision and scientific ingenuity in the field of nanofiltration, nanotechnology and water sustainability- A state of the art review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1