Al-Waili Noori
Private Clinic, Basic Science Research, Al-Rusafa, Baghdad, Iraq.
New York Medical Care for Nephrology, New York, 11418, US.
Vet World. 2018 Aug;11(8):1188-1195. doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2018.1188-1195. Epub 2018 Aug 29.
The study aimed to investigate whether mixing two different propolis samples can potentiate their biological activity. This hypothesis was tested by studying the effect of mixed propolis on microbial growth and wound healing and compared with the effect of each propolis individually.
The effect of mixing two different propolis extracts (A and B) collected from different locations in Iraq on , and was studied by minimum inhibitory concentration assessment and compared with the effect of each propolis. Wound healing effect of the mixed propolis was studied. Twenty-four rabbits were used for the experiment, and they were assigned to four groups. Wounds were created on the dorsum of each rabbit and treated by topical application of 1 mL of either mixed propolis, propolis A, or propolis B extracts or were kept without treatment as a control. Macroscopic wound evaluation was performed with an assessment of wound size, wound recovery, redness, edema, discharge, granulation tissue, and epithelialization.
Propolis A was more potent than propolis B extracts to inhibit the growth of , and (p<0.05). However, mixed propolis showed a higher antimicrobial activity toward all the pathogens than propolis A or propolis B extract individually (p<0.05). Furthermore, propolis A and propolis B extracts showed favorable effects on wound healing which was more pronounced with propolis A extract. Interestingly, mixed propolis accelerated wound healing faster than propolis A or propolis B extracts, and it shortened the time of reepithelialization (p<0.05).
This study demonstrates for the first time that mixing different propolis samples possesses a higher antimicrobial activity and higher wound healing property than individual propolis. This approach could pave the way for the development of more effective antimicrobials and wound healing agents.
本研究旨在调查混合两种不同的蜂胶样品是否能增强其生物活性。通过研究混合蜂胶对微生物生长和伤口愈合的影响来验证这一假设,并与每种蜂胶单独的效果进行比较。
通过最小抑菌浓度评估,研究了从伊拉克不同地点采集的两种不同蜂胶提取物(A和B)混合后对[具体微生物名称未给出]、[具体微生物名称未给出]和[具体微生物名称未给出]的影响,并与每种蜂胶的效果进行比较。研究了混合蜂胶的伤口愈合效果。使用24只兔子进行实验,将它们分为四组。在每只兔子的背部制造伤口,并通过局部涂抹1 mL混合蜂胶、蜂胶A或蜂胶B提取物进行治疗,或不进行治疗作为对照。对伤口进行宏观评估,包括伤口大小、伤口恢复情况、发红、水肿、分泌物、肉芽组织和上皮形成。
蜂胶A提取物比蜂胶B提取物更能有效抑制[具体微生物名称未给出]、[具体微生物名称未给出]和[具体微生物名称未给出]的生长(p<0.05)。然而,混合蜂胶对所有病原体的抗菌活性均高于单独的蜂胶A或蜂胶B提取物(p<0.05)。此外,蜂胶A和蜂胶B提取物对伤口愈合均有良好效果,蜂胶A提取物的效果更显著。有趣的是,混合蜂胶比蜂胶A或蜂胶B提取物能更快地加速伤口愈合,并缩短了上皮再形成的时间(p<0.05)。
本研究首次证明,混合不同的蜂胶样品比单一蜂胶具有更高的抗菌活性和更好的伤口愈合性能。这种方法可为开发更有效的抗菌剂和伤口愈合剂铺平道路。