Esra Kavaz1, Senem Çengel Kurnaz2, Dilek Güvenç3, Murat Yarım4, Abdurrahman Aksoy3. 1. Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Ondokuz Mayıs University School of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey. 2. Clinic of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Medicalpark Hospital, Samsun, Turkey. 3. Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Samsun, Turkey. 4. Department of Pathology, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Samsun, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: If the respiratory nasal mucosa is damaged and the mucosa does not heal properly during nasal or paranasal sinus surgery, a revision surgery may be required. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of oral propolis application on mucosal wound healing following endoscopic nasal surgery in a rabbit model. METHODS: Twenty four New Zealand rabbits were randomly divided into three groups, namely the experimental group (EG), the control group (CG), and the negative control group (NCG). Mucosal resection was applied with 3-mm punch forceps in the bilateral ventral nasal concha in the experimental and control groups. 75 mg/kg/day propolis was added to the diet of the rabbits in the EG for 14 days. The CG continued with the standard diet postoperatively. In the NCG, no surgical intervention was made, and no dietary support was given. On postoperative day 14 all rabbits were sacrificed and left nasal specimens were examined histopathologically, hydroxyproline levels were measured in right nasal specimens. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in hydroxyproline level, epithelial and subepithelial thickness, ciliary and goblet cell count, subepithelial fibrosis and collagen density between EG and CG. Neutrophil count was statistically significantly lower in EG, compared to CG (p=0.019, Tamhane test). CONCLUSION: Although there are many studies that show the positive effects of propolis on wound healing, such effect was not observed in this study. This study is deemed to constitute a unique experimental study that can be a resource for future similar studies to be performed with higher numbers of subjects and higher dosage of propolis.
OBJECTIVE: If the respiratory nasal mucosa is damaged and the mucosa does not heal properly during nasal or paranasal sinus surgery, a revision surgery may be required. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of oral propolis application on mucosal wound healing following endoscopic nasal surgery in a rabbit model. METHODS: Twenty four New Zealand rabbits were randomly divided into three groups, namely the experimental group (EG), the control group (CG), and the negative control group (NCG). Mucosal resection was applied with 3-mm punch forceps in the bilateral ventral nasal concha in the experimental and control groups. 75 mg/kg/day propolis was added to the diet of the rabbits in the EG for 14 days. The CG continued with the standard diet postoperatively. In the NCG, no surgical intervention was made, and no dietary support was given. On postoperative day 14 all rabbits were sacrificed and left nasal specimens were examined histopathologically, hydroxyproline levels were measured in right nasal specimens. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in hydroxyproline level, epithelial and subepithelial thickness, ciliary and goblet cell count, subepithelial fibrosis and collagen density between EG and CG. Neutrophil count was statistically significantly lower in EG, compared to CG (p=0.019, Tamhane test). CONCLUSION: Although there are many studies that show the positive effects of propolis on wound healing, such effect was not observed in this study. This study is deemed to constitute a unique experimental study that can be a resource for future similar studies to be performed with higher numbers of subjects and higher dosage of propolis.
Authors: Paul R Hutson; Mark E Crawford; Ronald L Sorkness Journal: J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci Date: 2003-07-05 Impact factor: 3.205
Authors: Matthew Proctor; Kerry Proctor; Xiao Zheng Shu; Lawrence D McGill; Glenn D Prestwich; Richard R Orlandi Journal: Am J Rhinol Date: 2006 Mar-Apr