| Title |
Effect of Clausena excavata Burm. f. (Rutaceae) leaf extract on wound healing and antioxidant activity in rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s84770 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shaymaa Fadhel Abbas Albaayit, Yusuf Abba, Abdullah Rasedee, Noorlidah Abdullah |
| Abstract |
Clausena excavata is a well-known plant used in folkloric medicine for the treatment of different ailments. This study aimed to determine the in vitro cytoxicity of its leaf solvent extracts as well as the in vivo wound healing and antioxidant activities of the methanolic extracts of C. excavata (MECE). HaCaT (keratocyte) and Vero cell lines were used for evaluation of the in vitro cytotoxic effects, while the in vivo wound healing and antioxidant activities were determined in skin wounds inflicted on rats. Twenty adult male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into five groups of four animals each. Approximately 3.14 cm(2) excisional wound was inflicted on the nape of each rat following anesthesia. The treatment groups received topical application of MECE at 50 mg/mL (MECE-LD [low dose]), 100 mg/mL (MECE-MD [medium dose]), and 200 mg/mL (MECE-HD [high dose]), while the negative control group was treated with gum acacia in normal saline and the positive control group with intrasite gel. Wound contraction was evaluated on days 5, 10, and 15 after wound infliction, and tissue from wound area was collected at day 15 post-wound infliction for antioxidant enzyme evaluation and histopathological analyses. Generally, Vero cells were more resistant to the cytotoxic effects of the solvent extracts as compared with HaCaT cells. Chloroform (CH) and ethyl acetate (EA) extracts of C. excavata were toxic to HaCaT cells at 200 and 400 µg/mL, but the same concentrations showed higher (P<0.05) viability in Vero cells. There was significantly (P<0.01) greater wound contraction at days 10 and 15 post-wound infliction in all the treatment groups than in the control groups. Histopathologically, the MECE-HD-treated wound showed significantly (P<0.05) lesser inflammatory cell proliferation, degeneration, and distribution of granulation tissue than other groups. Similarly, the degree of collagen maturation, angiogenesis, and collagen distribution were significantly (P<0.05) lower in MECE-HD than in other groups. The MECE-HD, MECE-MD, and intrasite treatment groups showed a significantly (P<0.05) higher number of VEGF-positive and TGF-β1-positive cells in the skin wound than the control groups. The activities of superoxide dismutase and catalase were significantly (P<0.01) higher in the MECE-HD and intrasite treatment groups than in the other groups. Lipid peroxidase activity of the treated groups was significantly (P<0.01) lower than that in the control group. The study showed that MECE is a potent wound healing agent through anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects that enhanced the rate of wound contraction, re-epithelialization, and collagen deposition. The effect of MECE is suggested to be due to its high polyphenolic compound content. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 7 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2015.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,437
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,785
of 277,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#108
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.