4.4 Article

Effects of topical topiramate in wound healing in mice

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 310, 期 4, 页码 363-373

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-018-1822-z

关键词

Topiramate; Wound healing; Insulin-signaling pathway

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation-CEPID-OCRC-Obesity Comorbidities Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have indicated that systemic topiramate can induce an improvement on the aesthetic appearance of skin scars. Here, we evaluated topical topiramate as an agent to improve wound healing in C57/BL6 mice. Mice were inflicted with a 6.0 mm punch to create two wounds in the skin of the dorsal region. Thereafter, mice were randomly assigned to either vehicle or topical topiramate (20 A mu l of 2% cream) once a day for 14 days, beginning on the same day as wound generation. We analyzed the wound samples over real-time PCR, Western blotting, and microscopy. There was no effect of the topiramate treatment on the time for complete reepithelization of the wound. However, on microscopic analysis, topiramate treatment resulted in increased granulation tissue, thicker epidermal repair, and improved deposition of type I collagen fibers. During wound healing, there were increased expressions of anti-inflammatory markers, such as IL-10, TGF-beta 1, and reduced expression of the active form of JNK. In addition, topiramate treatment increased the expression of active forms of two intermediaries in the insulin-signaling pathway, IRS-1 and Akt. Finally, at the end of the wound-healing process, topiramate treatment resulted in increased expression of SOX-2, a transcription factor that is essential to maintain cell self-renewal of undifferentiated embryonic stem cells. We conclude that topical topiramate can improve the overall quality of wound healing in the healthy skin of mice. This improvement is accompanied by reduced expression of markers involved in inflammation and increased expression of proteins of the insulin-signaling pathway.

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

4.4
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