| Title |
Wound healing: a new perspective on glucosylated tetrahydrocurcumin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s85041 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adari Bhaskar Rao, Ernala Prasad, Seelam Siva Deepthi, Vennapusa Haritha, Sistla Ramakrishna, Kuncha Madhusudan, Mullapudi Venkata Surekha, Yerramilli Sri Rama Venkata Rao |
| Abstract |
Wound healing represents a dynamic set of coordinated physiological processes observed in response to tissue injury. Several natural products are known to accelerate the process of wound healing. Tetrahydrocurcumin (THC), an in vivo biotransformed product/metabolite of curcumin, is known to exhibit a wide spectrum of biological activities similar to those of native curcuminoids. The poor bioavailability of these curcuminoids limits their clinical applications. The present study highlights the percutaneous absorption and wound healing activity of glucosyl-conjugated THC (glucosyl-THC) in male Wistar rats. A high plasma concentration of glucosyl-THC (4.35 μg/mL) was found in rats 3 hours after application. A significant enhanced wound healing activity and reduced epithelialization time were observed in rats that received glucosyl-THC. This may have been due to the improved bioavailability of the glucosyl compound. The nonstaining and lack of skin-sensitive side effects render the bioconjugated glucosyl-THC a promising therapeutic compound in the management of excision wounds and in cosmetic applications, in the near future. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
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 28 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,438,425
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,106
of 2,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,889
of 277,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#82
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,254 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 277,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.