Effects of Buprenorphine, Chlorhexidine, and Low-level Laser Therapy on Wound Healing in Mice.

IF 1.3 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Comparative medicine Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Epub Date: 2021-04-16 DOI:10.30802/AALAS-CM-20-000104
Donna R Webb, Sheba R Churchill, Georgette D Hill, Christopher A McGee, Min Shi, Angela P King-Herbert, Terry L Blankenship-Paris
{"title":"Effects of Buprenorphine, Chlorhexidine, and Low-level Laser Therapy on Wound Healing in Mice.","authors":"Donna R Webb,&nbsp;Sheba R Churchill,&nbsp;Georgette D Hill,&nbsp;Christopher A McGee,&nbsp;Min Shi,&nbsp;Angela P King-Herbert,&nbsp;Terry L Blankenship-Paris","doi":"10.30802/AALAS-CM-20-000104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Systemic buprenorphine and topical antiseptics such as chlorhexidine are frequently used in research animals to aid in pain control and to reduce infection, respectively. These therapeutics are controversial, especially when used in wound healing studies, due to conflicting data suggesting that they delay wound healing. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been used to aid in wound healing without exerting the systemic effects of therapies such as buprenorphine. We conducted 2 studies to investigate the effects of these common treatment modalities on the rate of wound healing in mice. The first study used models of punch biopsy and dermal abrasion to assess whether buprenorphine HCl or 0.12% chlorhexidine delayed wound healing. The second study investigated the effects of sustained-released buprenorphine, 0.05% chlorhexidine, and LLLT on excisional wound healing. The rate of wound healing was assessed by obtaining photographs on days 0, 2, 4, 7, and 9 for the punch biopsy model in study 1, days 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, and 13 for the dermal abrasion model in study 1, and days 0, 3, 6, and 10 for the mice in study 2. Image J software was used to analyze the photographed wounds to determine the wound area. When comparing the wound area on the above days to the original wound area, no significant differences in healing were observed for any of the treatment groups at any time period for either study. Given the results of these studies, we believe that systemic buprenorphine, topical chlorhexidine, and LLLT can be used without impairing or delaying wound healing in mice.</p>","PeriodicalId":10659,"journal":{"name":"Comparative medicine","volume":"71 3","pages":"191-202"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8223867/pdf/cm2021000191.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-CM-20-000104","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Systemic buprenorphine and topical antiseptics such as chlorhexidine are frequently used in research animals to aid in pain control and to reduce infection, respectively. These therapeutics are controversial, especially when used in wound healing studies, due to conflicting data suggesting that they delay wound healing. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been used to aid in wound healing without exerting the systemic effects of therapies such as buprenorphine. We conducted 2 studies to investigate the effects of these common treatment modalities on the rate of wound healing in mice. The first study used models of punch biopsy and dermal abrasion to assess whether buprenorphine HCl or 0.12% chlorhexidine delayed wound healing. The second study investigated the effects of sustained-released buprenorphine, 0.05% chlorhexidine, and LLLT on excisional wound healing. The rate of wound healing was assessed by obtaining photographs on days 0, 2, 4, 7, and 9 for the punch biopsy model in study 1, days 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, and 13 for the dermal abrasion model in study 1, and days 0, 3, 6, and 10 for the mice in study 2. Image J software was used to analyze the photographed wounds to determine the wound area. When comparing the wound area on the above days to the original wound area, no significant differences in healing were observed for any of the treatment groups at any time period for either study. Given the results of these studies, we believe that systemic buprenorphine, topical chlorhexidine, and LLLT can be used without impairing or delaying wound healing in mice.

丁丙诺啡、氯己定和低水平激光治疗对小鼠伤口愈合的影响。
全身丁丙诺啡和局部防腐剂,如氯己定,经常用于研究动物,以帮助控制疼痛和减少感染。这些治疗方法是有争议的,特别是在伤口愈合研究中使用时,由于相互矛盾的数据表明它们会延迟伤口愈合。低水平激光治疗(LLLT)已被用于帮助伤口愈合,而不发挥丁丙诺啡等疗法的全身作用。我们进行了两项研究,以调查这些常见治疗方式对小鼠伤口愈合速度的影响。第一项研究使用穿孔活检和皮肤磨损模型来评估盐酸丁丙诺啡或0.12%氯己定是否延迟伤口愈合。第二项研究探讨了缓释丁丙诺啡、0.05%氯己定和LLLT对切除创面愈合的影响。研究1中的穿孔活检模型在第0、2、4、7和9天,研究1中的皮肤磨损模型在第0、1、2、4、6、8、11和13天,研究2中的小鼠在第0、3、6和10天,通过拍摄照片来评估伤口愈合率。Image J软件对拍摄的创面进行分析,确定创面面积。当将上述天数的伤口面积与原始伤口面积进行比较时,在两项研究的任何时间段,任何治疗组的愈合均未观察到显着差异。鉴于这些研究的结果,我们认为全身丁丙诺啡、局部氯己定和LLLT可以在不损害或延迟小鼠伤口愈合的情况下使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Comparative medicine
Comparative medicine 医学-动物学
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Comparative Medicine (CM), an international journal of comparative and experimental medicine, is the leading English-language publication in the field and is ranked by the Science Citation Index in the upper third of all scientific journals. The mission of CM is to disseminate high-quality, peer-reviewed information that expands biomedical knowledge and promotes human and animal health through the study of laboratory animal disease, animal models of disease, and basic biologic mechanisms related to disease in people and animals.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信