article · Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy
Licorice alcoholic extract can accelerate cutaneous wound healing through combined antioxidant, immune, and anti-inflammatory mechanisms. In an experimental evaluation involving twenty-four Wistar rats divided into control, topical, and oral treatment groups, both administration routes improved several biological markers of tissue repair. Licorice treatment increased total leucocyte counts, neutrophil phagocytic activity, and cellular antioxidant enzymes including superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase, while significantly reducing oxidative stress markers such as malondialdehyde. Tissue examinations revealed complete re-epithelialisation and enhanced collagen synthesis. In addition, treated subjects showed elevated expression of structural and healing markers, alongside the up-regulation of genes driving angiogenesis and tissue growth, specifically bFGF, VEGF, and TGF-beta. Chemical profiling authenticated the plant material and identified 101 chemical constituents potentially responsible for these restorative effects.
Wound management remains an ongoing healthcare challenge where existing therapies can present clinical and economic limitations. Natural extracts with dual antioxidant and anti-inflammatory actions offer a compelling route to develop accessible, multi-targeted wound dressings or systemic treatments. By detailing how licorice speeds tissue repair and tissue regeneration at a molecular level, this research provides a mechanistic foundation for developing plant-derived alternatives for wound care.
This research could support the development of novel topical formulations or oral supplements for wound healing, targeting pharmaceutical manufacturers and dermatology product developers. Because the findings are derived exclusively from an in vivo rat model alongside analytical profiling, this technology remains at an early laboratory stage. Extensive human clinical trials, formulation optimisation, and safety evaluations will be required before commercial market entry is feasible.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
Wound healing is a public health concern. Licorice gained a great attention for its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties which expand its valuable effects as a herbal medicine. In this study, we pointed out to the wound healing potential and the mechanism by which licorice alcoholic extract can modulate cutaneous wound healing through immune, antioxidant, histopathological, immunohistochemical (IHC) and molecular studies. 24 Wister rats were assigned into 3 groups (n = 8 each); control group, topical and oral supplied groups. Licorice extract administration significantly increased total and differential leucocyte counts, phagocytic activity of neutrophils, antioxidant biomarkers as superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase activities (GPx) and reduced glutathione (GSH) content with a notable reduction in oxidative stress marker malondialdehyde (MDA). Moreover, histopathological findings detected complete re-epithelialization with increasing collagen synthesis while IHC results revealed a significant enhancement in the expression of α-SMA, PDGFR-α, FGFR1 and Cytokeratin 14 in licorice treated groups compared with the control group. Licorice extract supplementation accelerated wound healing by increasing angiogenesis and collagen deposition through up-regulation of bFGF, VEGF and TGF-β gene expression levels compared with the control group. UPLC-PDA-MS/MS aided to authenticate the studied Glycyrrihza species and recognized 101 potential constituents that may be responsible for licorice-exhibited potentials. Based on our observations we concluded that licorice enhanced cutaneous wound healing via its free radical-scavenging potential, potent antioxidant activities, and anti-inflammatory actions. Therefore, licorice could be used as a potential alternative therapy for wound injury which could overcome the associated limitations of modern therapeutic products.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2021.112151
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
