4.7 Article

Gelatin-based membrane containing usnic acid-loaded liposomes: A new treatment strategy for corneal healing

期刊

BIOMEDICINE & PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER FRANCE-EDITIONS SCIENTIFIQUES MEDICALES ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2020.110391

关键词

Usnic acid; Eye burn; Healing

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP, Brazil) [2014/50928-2]
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico'' (CNPq, Brazil) [465687/2014-8]
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES) [23038.000776/2017O54]
  4. Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa (CNPq)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and potential healing efficacy of the topical ocular administration of a gelatin membrane containing usnic acid/liposomes (UALs) for corneal cicatrization. UALs have shown healing activity in animal models of dermal burn lesions. We evaluated the safety of topical ocular administration of UAL and its potential healing efficacy as an ophthalmic treatment on chemical lesions in rabbit eyes. Method: The Draize test was used to check for ocular toxicity and the score was zero at each observation, indicating the ocular safety of a gelatin membrane containing usnic acid/liposome. Its potential healing efficacy as an ophthalmic treatment on chemical lesions in rabbit eyes was also assessed. Results: After epithelial removal and treatment with UAL, there was a 49.4 % reduction in injury under in vivo conditions compared with a 36.6 % reduction in the control, a gelatin membrane containing liposome without usnic acid. Histological analysis of ocular surface chemical injury-tissue sections after treatment with UAL supported these observations. The corneal expression of VEGF and TGF-beta 1increased by 70 % and 50 % respectively following treatment with UAL gelatin membrane. Conclusion: These results indicate the potential therapeutic application of UAL gelatin membranes as an ophthalmic treatment that may be used for corneal cicatrization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据