ポリマーマトリックス上の生体医薬品応答性パッチオーバーレイの創傷治癒効率の臨床前評価：比較研究

Wound healing is a complex biological process requiring effective therapeutic strategies to promote tissue regeneration and angiogenesis. This preclinical study evaluates the efficacy of two newly formulated bio-polymeric patches (Sample 1 and Sample 2) in comparison to a standard treatment (Tegaderm-3M) and an untreated control, using a full-thickness excisional wound model in Swiss albino mice.

Twenty-four healthy adult male mice were randomly allocated into four groups (n = 6/group). Following ethical approval (Ref: AU/SOHMS/DOPT/2024/CCSEA/P05), standardized wounds were created, and treatments were administered accordingly. Wound progression was documented photographically on Days 0, 3, 7, and 10, and tissue samples were analyzed histologically using Hematoxylin & Eosin, Masson's Trichrome, and CD31 immunohistochemistry.

Results demonstrated significantly improved wound closure, reduced inflammation, enhanced collagen deposition, and greater angiogenesis in treated groups, particularly in Sample 2. By Day 10, Sample 2 exhibited near-complete epithelialization, mature dermal architecture, and robust CD31-positive endothelial cell presence, indicating enhanced neovascularization. Compared to the control, which showed delayed healing, poor collagen organization, and minimal angiogenesis, both treated samples and the standard group showed superior outcomes in terms of tissue restoration and remodelling. Histological evaluations confirmed Sample 2's superiority in promoting early re-epithelialization and dense collagen matrix formation, while immunohistochemical data supported its pro-angiogenic potential.

In conclusion, the bio-polymeric patch represented by Sample 2 significantly accelerated wound healing, demonstrating outcomes comparable to a commercial standard. These findings support its potential as a promising candidate for advanced wound care therapeutics in clinical applications.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors   www.springer.com/00266 .