Advertisement

European Journal of Plastic Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 5, pp 489–494 | Cite as

Skin wound healing properties of Hypericum perforatum, Liquidambar orientalis, and propolis mixtures

  • Mehmet AltıparmakEmail author
  • Mustafa Kule
  • Yasin Öztürk
  • Serkan Yaşar Çelik
  • Mehmet Öztürk
  • Mehmet E. Duru
  • Uğur Koçer
Original Paper
  • 70 Downloads

Abstract

Traditional formulation therapies based on natural origin compounds offer new alternatives for treatment of skin wounds. Hypericum perforatum (HP), Liquidambar orientalis (LO), and propolis have been proved to promote skin wound healing. Extracts of these compounds are traditionally used as folk remedies. They all have different effects on each phases of wound healing. Wound healing effects of the mixtures of these compounds were investigated. HP, LO, and propolis were prepared as combinations of mixtures at an equal rate. Fifty Spraque-Dawley rats were included in this study. They were divided into the following 5 groups: group 1 (control), group 2 (HP-propolis, 1:1), group 3 (HP-LO, 1:1), group 4 (LO-propolis, 1:1), and group 5 (HP-LO-propolis, 1:1:1). Two incisional wounds were made and primarily closed on the interscapular region of every rat. Formulations were applied daily on the wounds. Biopsies were taken on days 3, 7, and 21 postoperatively from every rat. Histopathological and tensile strength parameters were analyzed. Angiogenesis and epithelialization rates were significantly higher in treatment groups compared with control (p < 0.05). Inflammation was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in treatment groups compared with control. There was no significance in tensile strength between groups. There was no difference between treatment groups. Hypericum perforatum, Liquidambar orientalis, and propolis have all improved wound healing in incisional wounds. Although they produced different effects on various parameters, mixtures of these compounds ensure a more stable response to wounds. As a result, we can mention about a positive synergy between the compounds. Level of Evidence: Level III, Experimental study.

Keywords

Combination therapy Hypericum perforatum Liquidambar orientalis Propolis Traditional therapy Wound healing 

Notes

Funding

This study was supported by the Funding of Scientific Research Projects of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Grant No: 17/045.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Mehmet Altıparmak, Mustafa Kule, Yasin Öztürk, Serkan Y. Çelik, Mehmet Öztürk, Mehmet E. Duru, and Uğur Koçer declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study was ethically approved by Ankara Education and Research Hospital Ethical Committee No: 0030 Decision: 403.

Informed consent

N/A

References

  1. 1.
    Pereira RF, Bártolo PJ (2016) Traditional therapies for skin wound healing. Adv Wound Care 5(5):208–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ernst E, Rand JI, Barnes J, Stevinson C (1998) Adverse effects profile of the herbal antidepressant St. John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum L.). Eur J Clin Pharmacol 54(8):589–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Samadi S, Khadivzadeh T, Emami A, Moosavi NS, Tafaghodi M, Behnam HR (2010) The effect of Hypericum perforatum on the wound healing and scar of cesarean. J Altern Complement Med (New York, NY) 16(1):113–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schempp CM, Windeck T, Hezel S, Simon JC (2003) Topical treatment of atopic dermatitis with St. John’s wort cream--a randomized, placebo controlled, double blind half-side comparison. Phytomedicine 10(Suppl 4):31–37 Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12807340. Accessed: 11 April 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yücel A et al (2017) Effect of St.John’s wort (Hypericum perforatum) oily extract for the care and treatment of pressure sores; a case report. J Ethnopharmacol 196:236–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Süntar IP, Akkol EK, Yılmazer D, Baykal T, Kırmızıbekmez H, Alper M, Yeşilada E (2010) Investigations on the in vivo wound healing potential of Hypericum perforatum L. J Ethnopharmacol 127(2):468–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maisenbacher P, Kovar KA (1992) Analysis and stability of Hyperici oleum. Planta Med 58(4):351–354Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altıparmak M, Eskitaşçıoğlu T (2018) Comparison of systemic and topical Hypericum perforatum on diabetic surgical wounds. J Investig Surg 31(1):29–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Süntar I, Akkol EK, Keleş H, Oktem A, Başer KHC, Yeşilada E (2011) A novel wound healing ointment: a formulation of Hypericum perforatum oil and sage and oregano essential oils based on traditional Turkish knowledge. J Ethnopharmacol 134(1):89–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Irina Prisăcaru A et al (2013) Evaluation of the wound-healing effect of a novel Hypericum perforatum ointment in skin injury. Romanian J Morphol Embryol 54(4):1053–1059 Available at: http://www.rjme.ro/RJME/resources/files/54041310531059.pdf. Accessed: 27 February 2018Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Han MC et al (2005) Effects of Turkish propolis and silver sulfadiazine on burn wound healing in rats. Rev Med Vet 156(12):624–627Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luiz Cavalcanti de Albuquerque-Júnior R et al (2009) Effect of bovine type-I collagen-based films containing red propolis on dermal wound healing in rodent model Efecto de Películas a Base de Colágeno Bovino Tipo I que Contienen Propóleo Rojo sobre la Cicatrización de la Herida Cutánea en un Modelo Roedor. Int J Morphol 27(4):1105–1110 Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a45e/d45dea1d54c6688f3d35af2a7c2c07dd4d6d.pdf. Accessed: 11 April 2018Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Serarslan G, Altuğ E, Kontas T, Atik E, Avci G (2007) Caffeic acid phenetyl ester accelerates cutaneous wound healing in a rat model and decreases oxidative stress. Clin Exp Dermatol 32(6):709–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Song YS, Park EH, Jung KJ, Jin C (2002) Inhibition of angiogenesis by Propolis. Arch Pharm Res 25(4):500–504 Available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FBF02976609.pdf. Accessed: 23 April 2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McLennan SV et al (2008) The anti-inflammatory agent propolis improves wound healing in a rodent model of experimental diabetes. Wound Repair Regen 16(5):706–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Henshaw FR, Bolton T, Nube V, Hood A, Veldhoen D, Pfrunder L, McKew GL, Macleod C, McLennan SV, Twigg SM (2014) Topical application of the bee hive protectant propolis is well tolerated and improves human diabetic foot ulcer healing in a prospective feasibility study. J Diabetes Complicat 28(6):850–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lingbeck JM et al (2015) Sweetgum: an ancient source of beneficial compounds with modern benefits. Pharmacogn Rev 9(17):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duru ME, Cakir A, Harmandar M (2002) Composition of the volatile oils isolated from the leaves of Liquidambar orientalis Mill. Var. orientalis and L. orientalis var. integriloba from Turkey. Flavour Fragr J 17(2):95–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ökmen G, Cantekin Z, Alam MI, Türkcan O, Ergün Y (2017) Antibacterial and antioxidant activities of Liquidambar orientalis mill. various extracts against bacterial pathogens causing mastitis. Turk J Agric Food Sci Technol [s.n.] 5.  https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v5i8.883-887.1163
  20. 20.
    Sova M (2012) Antioxidant and antimicrobial activities of cinnamic acid derivatives. Mini-Rev Med Chem 12(8):749–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ocsel H, Teke Z, Sacar M, Kabay B, Duzcan SE, Kara IG (2012) Effects of oriental sweet gum storax on porcine wound healing. J Investig Surg 25:262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sağdıç O, Özkan G, Özcan M, Özçelik S (2005) A study on inhibitory effects of Sığla tree (Liquidambar orientalis mill. var. orientalis) storax against several bacteria. Phytother Res 19(6):549–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ozbek N et al (2005) The effect of pre-operative conventional and hyperfractionated radiotherapy schedules on wound healing and tensile strength in rats: an experimental study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 34(2):185–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yanik ME et al (2016) Comparison of topical treatment with silver sulfadiazine and sweetgum oil (Liquidambar orientalis) on burn wound healing in an experimental rat model. Anal Quant Cytol Histol 38(3):168–174Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Eick S, Schäfer G, Kwieciński J, Atrott J, Henle T, Pfister W (2014) Honey – a potential agent against Porphyromonas gingivalis: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health 14(1):24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Khayyal MT, el-Ghazaly MA, el-Khatib AS (1993) Mechanisms involved in the antiinflammatory effect of propolis extract. Drugs Exp Clin Res 19(5):197–203 Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7513636. Accessed: 25 April 2018Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kıyan S et al (n.d.) Investigation of acute effects of Hypericum perforatum (St. John’s Wort-Kantaron) treatment in experimental thermal burns and comparison with silver sulfadiazine treatment.  https://doi.org/10.5505/tjtes.2015.63822
  28. 28.
    Allendorf JDF, Bessler M, Huang J, Kayton ML, Laird D, Nowygrod R, Treat MR (1997) Helium-neon laser irradiation at fluences of 1, 2, and 4 J/cm2 failed to accelerate wound healing as assessed by both wound contracture rate and tensile strength. Lasers Surg Med 20(3):340–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Medicine, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic SurgeryMuğla Sıtkı Koçman UniversityMuğlaTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Medicine, Department of OtorhinolaryngologyMuğla Sıtkı Koçman UniversityMuğlaTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic SurgeryAnkara Education and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey
  4. 4.Faculty of Medicine, Department of PathologyMuğla Sıtkı Koçman UniversityMuğlaTurkey
  5. 5.Faculty of Science, Chemistry DepartmentMuğla Sıtkı Koçman UniversityMuğlaTurkey

Personalised recommendations