Author/Authors :
Kahkeshani، N. نويسنده 1Department of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, I.R. Iran. , , Farahanikia، B. نويسنده Traditional Iranian Medicine and Pharmacy Research Center, School of Traditional Iranian Medicine,Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, I.R. Iran. , , Mahdaviani، P. نويسنده Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, I.R. Iran. , , Abdolghaffari، A. نويسنده Tehran University of Medical Sciences, International campus, ICTUMS. , , Hassanzadeh، Gh. نويسنده Department of Anatomy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, I.R. Iran. , , Abdollahi، M. نويسنده Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, I.R. Iran. , , Khanavi، M. نويسنده Department of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ,
Abstract :
This study was conducted to evaluate the burn wound healing and antioxidant activity of methanolic and aqueous extracts of Galium odoratum (L.) Scop. in rats. Second degree burn wounds were induced in six groups of six rats each. Groups 1 and 2 received eucerin and silver sulfadiazine as control and reference standard and groups 3, 4, 5 and 6 were given methanolic and aqueous extracts of 15% and 30% (w/w in eucerin base) respectively. The topical treatment was done daily for 14 days. The percentage of wound contraction and histology parameters of healed wounds were observed. The antioxidant potential of both extracts was assessed by 1, 1-diphenyl-2-picryl-hydrazyl (DPPH) assay. There was statistically significant improvement in wound contraction of animals treated with extracts in comparison to control (p ? 0.001). The healed wounds in extracts-treated animals contained less inflammatory cells and had better re-epithelialization. Wound contraction and histology parameters were relatively better in aqueous extract (90.68 ± 6.13% and 97.18 ± 4.37% for aqueous extracts of 15% and 30% in comparison to 79.29 ± 9.16% and 91.94 ± 4.14% for methanolic extracts of 15% and 30% respectively). In DPPH assay, both methanolic and aqueous extracts displayed significant antioxidant activity with IC50 values of 148 µg/ml and 83 µg/ml, respectively. In conclusion, both extracts had desirable antioxidant potential plus experimentally and histologically ascertained burn wound healing activity, relatively better for aqueous extract.
