4.3 Article

Evaluation of wound healing and antimicrobial properties of aqueous extract from Bowdichia virgilioides stem barks in mice

Journal

ANAIS DA ACADEMIA BRASILEIRA DE CIENCIAS
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages 945-954

Publisher

ACAD BRASILEIRA DE CIENCIAS
DOI: 10.1590/S0001-37652013005000049

Keywords

wound healing; antimicrobial effect; Bowdichia virgilioides; medicinal plant

Funding

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  2. Programa de Cooperacao Academica/Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (PROCAD/CAPES)
  3. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Alagoas (FAPEAL) (Brazil)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The decoction of the stern barks from Bowdichia virgilioides KUNTH is a folk remedy used to treat inflammatory disorders in Latin American and Brazil. In the present study, the wound healing activity of aqueous extract of the stem bark from B. virgilioides. called AERv, was evaluated by the rate of healing by wound contraction and period of epithelization at different days post-wound using the wound excisional model. On day 9. the AEBv-treated animals exhibited significative reduction in the wound area when compared with controls. In wound infected with S. aurens, the AEBv significantly improved the wound contraction when compared to the saline-treated mice. The histological analysis showed that AEBv induced a collagen deposition, increase in the fibroblast count and few inflammatory cells than compared to saline-treated group. The expression of collagen type I was increased in the group treated with ALBv as indicated by immunohistochemical staining. In vitro, the AEBv was effective only against S. aureus but not against P. aeruginosa. Together, the results of this study demonstrate, for the first time, the healing and antimicrobiological effects of aqueous extract of the stem bark from B. virgilioides in the therapy of skin wounds.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available