Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Nutrients ; 15(8)2023 Apr 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37111041

ABSTRACT

The probiotics Lactiplantibacillus plantarum UBLP-40, Lactobacillus rhamnosus UBLR-58 and Bifidobacterium longum UBBL-64 seem to promote wound healing when applied topically. Our aim was to investigate their effect on the mRNA expression of pro-inflammatory, healing and angiogenetic factors during the healing process of a standardized excisional wound model in rats. Rats subjected to six dorsal skin wounds were allocated to Control; L. plantarum; combined formula of L. rhamnosus plus B. longum; L. rhamnosus; and B. longum treatments, applied every two days, along with tissue collection. The pro-inflammatory, wound-healing, and angiogenetic factors of mRNA expression were assessed by qRT-PCR. We found that L. plantarum exerts a strong anti-inflammatory effect in relation to L. rhamnosus-B. longum, given alone or in combination; the combined regime of L. rhamnosus-B. longum, works better, greatly promoting the expression of healing and angiogenic factors than L. plantarum. When separately tested, L. rhamnosus was found to work better than B. longum in promoting the expression of healing factors, while B. longum seems stronger than L. rhamnosus in the expression of angiogenic factors. We, therefore, suggest that an ideal probiotic treatment should definitively contain more than one probiotic strain to speed up all three healing phases.


Subject(s)
Bifidobacterium longum , Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus , Probiotics , Rats , Animals , Wound Healing , RNA, Messenger
2.
Pharmaceuticals (Basel) ; 15(10)2022 Oct 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36297405

ABSTRACT

Bifidobacterium lactis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Saccharomyces boulardii are common probiotic supplements. Colonic subepithelial myofibroblasts (cSEMFs) are actively involved in mucosal wound healing and inflammation. cSEMFs, isolated from healthy individuals, were stimulated with 102 or 104 cfu/mL of these probiotic strains alone and in combination, and their effect on chemokine and wound healing factor expression was assessed by qRT-PCR, ELISA and Sircol Assay, and on cSEMFs migration, by Wound Healing Assay. These strains remained viable and altered cSEMFs' inflammatory and wound healing behavior, depending on the strain and concentration. cSEMFs treated with a combination of the four probiotics had a moderate, but statistically significant, increase in the mRNA and/or protein expression of chemokines CXCL1, CXCL2, CXCL4, CXCL8, CXCL10, CCL2 and CCL5, and healing factors, collagen type I and III, fibronectin and tissue factor. In contrast, when each strain was administered alone, different effects were observed, with greater increase or decrease in chemokine and healing factor expression, which was balanced by the mixture. Overall, this study highlights that the use of multiple probiotic strains can potentially alert the gut mucosal immune system and promote wound healing, having a better effect on mucosal immunity than the use of single probiotics.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...