| Literature DB >> 33841541 |
Kaan Kaltalioglu1, Barbaros Balabanli2, Sule Coskun-Cevher2.
Abstract
As stated in many ethnobotany studies, Potentilla genus is traditionally used in the treatment of wound healing. In this study, we aimed to investigate to time-course effects of the methanolic extract of Potentilla erecta (P. erecta) (MEPE) on diabetic wounds. The subject of the experiments was 36 Wistar rats, divided into three main groups: non-diabetic control (NDM), diabetic control (STZ-DM), and P. erecta-treated (MEPE). Diabetes was induced by streptozotocin (STZ). Full-thickness excisional skin wounds were opened in rats. The wounds were treated with P. erecta root extract in the MEPE groups. The wound area, wound contraction rate, collagen, thiobarbituric-acid reactive substances (TBARs), nitric oxide (NOx), and glutathione (GSH) levels in wound tissue were determined for the evaluation of the wound healing on days 0, 3 and 7. Phenolic compounds of MEPE were determined by RP-HPLC-UV. The antioxidant properties were spectrophotometrically determined and the antibacterial properties were tested using the microwell-dilution method. Our results demonstrated that MEPE significantly increased wound contraction rate compared to the STZ-DM group on days 3 and 7. MEPE treated rats showed a statistical increase in the levels of NOx, GSH, collagen and a statistical decrease in the levels of TBARs. Our results, for the first time, may indicate that P. erecta root extract improves and accelerates diabetic wound healing and also alters oxidative events.Entities:
Keywords: Antimicrobial; Diabetes; Phenolics; Potentilla erecta; Wound healing
Year: 2020 PMID: 33841541 PMCID: PMC8019876 DOI: 10.22037/ijpr.2019.112411.13742
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Pharm Res ISSN: 1726-6882 Impact factor: 1.696
Wound areas (mm2) and the rates of wound contraction of rats
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 62.09 ± 3.50 | 62.89 ± 3.73 | 60.30 ± 1.44 |
| 3 | 29.84 ± 3.17a | 43.80 ± 2.05a, b, e | 30.77 ± 2.11a, b, d |
| 7 | 7.04 ± 1.15a, c | 24.07 ± 1.68a, b, c, e | 8.02 ± 0.99a, b, c, d |
Data are expressed as means ± standard deviations.
a P < 0.001 as compared with the non-diabetic control (NDM) on day 0.
bP < 0.001 as compared with the diabetic control (STZ-DM) group on day 0.
cP < 0.001 when compared intragroup day 3.
dP < 0.001 as compared with the diabetic control (STZ-DM) group on same day.
eP < 0.001 as compared with the non-diabetic control (NDM) group on same day.
Figure 1Effects of the methanol extract of P. erecta (MEPE) on the wound area
Phenolic constituents of the MEPE by RP-HPLC-UV
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gallic Acid | 0.411 |
| 2 | Protocatechuic Acid | 0.082 |
| 3 |
| < LOD |
| 4 | Chlorogenic Acid | < LOD |
| 5 | Vanillic Acid | < LOD |
| 6 | Caffeic Acid | < LOD |
| 7 | Syringic Acid | < LOD |
| 8 | Ellagic Acid | < LOD |
| 9 |
| < LOD |
| 10 | Rutin | 0.287 |
| 11 | Ferulic Acid | < LOD |
| 12 | Myricetin | < LOD |
| 13 | Fisetin | < LOD |
| 14 | Quercetin | < LOD |
| 15 | Apigenin | < LOD |
| 16 | Kaempferol | < LOD |
| 17 | Isorhamnetin | < LOD |
< LOD: below the limit of detection.
Figure 2Chromatogram of MEPE (A) gallic acid, (B) protocatechuic acid, (C) rutin
Effects of the MEPE on some important biochemical parameters during wound healing process on days 0, 3, and 7
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NDM | 0 day | 34.73 ± 1.37 | 776.64 ± 76.71 | 57.12 ± 5.02 | 5.53 ± 0.41 |
| 3 day (n = 6) | 18.04 ± 1.32a | 773.76 ± 58.59 | 43.19 ± 3.51a | 2.78 ± 0.15a | |
| 7 day (n = 6) | 27.21 ± 0.53a,c | 586.56 ± 47.70a,c | 47.18 ± 2.61a | 1.47 ± 0.05a,c | |
| STZ-DM | 0 day | 15.93 ± 0.90a | 526.08 ± 31.27a | 68.14 ± 5.25a | 0.98 ± 0.98a |
| 3 day (n = 6) | 7.26 ± 0.53a,b,e | 522.24 ± 36.55a,e | 41.92 ± 3.13a,b | 0.81 ± 0.07a,e | |
| 7 day (n = 6) | 7.26 ± 0.60a,b,e | 555.84 ± 10.14a | 44.01 ± 3.86a,b | 0.93 ± 0.03a,e | |
| MEPE | 3 day (n = 6) | 7.25 ± 0.51a,b,e | 837.12 ± 44.72b,d | 15.99 ± 1.70a,b,d,e | 1.27 ± 0.08a,d,e |
| 7 day (n = 6) | 26.86 ± 1.93a,b,c,d | 716.16 ± 35.44b,d | 16.44 ± 1.71a,b,d,e | 2.46 ± 0.16a,e,b,c,d | |
Data are expressed as means ± standard deviations.
aP < 0.001 as compared with the non-diabetic control (NDM) on day 0.
bP < 0.001 as compared with the diabetic control (STZ-DM) group on day 0.
cP < 0.001 when compared intragroup day 3.
dP < 0.001 as compared with the diabetic control (STZ-DM) group on the same day.
eP < 0.001 as compared with the non-diabetic control (NDM) group on same day.
Minimal inhibitor concentrations (MIC, μg/mL extract) of plant extract and reference antibiotics
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
|
| 625 | - | 0.49 | - | ||
|
| 2500 | 0.98 | 0.49 | - | ||
|
| 625 | 0.49 | 0.98 | - | ||
|
| 1250 | 1.95 | 62.5 | - | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| 1250 | 7.81 | 0.49 | - | ||
|
| 5000 | - | 0.49 | - | ||
|
| 1250 | - | 0.49 | - | ||
|
| 2500 | - | 0.98 | - | ||
|
| 156.25 | 125 | 31.25 | - | ||
|
| 5000 | 7.81 | 0.98 | - | ||
|
| ||||||
|
| 5000 | - | - | 1.95 | ||
Total phenolic contents, ferric reducing antioxidant power, and radical scavenging activities of MEPE
|
| |
|---|---|
| TPC (mg GAE/g extract) | 339.467 ± 12.563 |
| FRAP (mM FeSO4.7H2O equivalents/g extract) | 5.080 ± 0.005 |
| DPPH (IC50: μg/mL) | 0.012 ± 0.001 |