Effect of N-Acetylcysteine Oral Administration on Cutaneous Wound Healing
Nida Sadaqat1, Sheheyar Ahmed Khan1, Amna Bibi1, Sadaf Zahra1, Muhammad faisal Salamt1, Noreen Latief2 and Fatima Ali1*
1Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (IMBB), The University of Lahore (UOL), Lahore, Pakistan.
2Center of Excellence in Molecular Biology, University of The Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan.
Fig. 1.
Effect of NAC on wound healing. (A) Wound contraction area in burn, and burn + NAC group. Wound appearance following 14 days of treatment with NAC. (B-C) Wound healing area and wound healing rate. (D) Effects of NAC on hydroxyproline levels in the burn wound model. Control versus burn group, #P < 0.05; ##P < 0.01; and ###P < 0.001; Control versus Burn+NAC group, ΦP < 0.05; ΦΦP < 0.01; and ΦΦΦP < 0.001; Burn versus Burn+NAC group, *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; and ***P < 0.001.
Fig. 2.
Histological examination of skin tissue. A, Control group; B, Burn group; C, Burn+NAC group; D, Summary of histological of features of wound healing.
Fig. 3.
Assessment of oxidative stress markers in treatment groups. A, Superoxide dismutase (SOD); B, Reduced glutathione (GSH); C, Catalase (CAT); D, Malondialdehyde (MD A). Error bars represent ± standard error of mean (SEM). Control versus burn group, #P < 0.05; ##P < 0.01; and ###P < 0.001; Control versus Burn+NAC group, ΦP < 0.05; ΦΦP < 0.01; and ΦΦΦP < 0.001; Burn versus Burn+NAC group, *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; and ***P < 0.001.
Fig. 4.
Effect of NAC on gene-expression analysis of rats inflicted with burn injury. Gene expression of skin preconditioned with NAC groups compared with control and Burn group along with corresponding quantification. Error bars represent ± standard error of mean (SEM). Control versus burn group, #P < 0.05; ##P < 0.01; and ###P < 0.001; Control versus Burn+NAC group, ΦP < 0.05; ΦΦP < 0.01; and ΦΦΦP < 0.001; Burn versus Burn+NAC group, *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; and ***P < 0.001.