Fig. 4: In vivo wound healing efficacy on diabetic rat models. | Nature Communications

Fig. 4: In vivo wound healing efficacy on diabetic rat models.

From: Low-intensity focused ultrasound-activated piezoelectric gel bandage for diabetic wound repair and neuropathic pain relief

Fig. 4: In vivo wound healing efficacy on diabetic rat models.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a Schematic diagram of the in vivo study design on diabetic rat wound model. b Representative photographs of diabetic wounds and traces of wound closure from day 0 to day 14 in different groups (Scale bar: 5 mm). c Relative wound closure rates of rats after different interventions (n = 5 rats per group). d Representative images of H&E staining of rat skin tissue (Scale bar, 300 µm (top) and 80 μm (enlarged)). e Representative images of Masson staining and collagen I and collagen III IHC staining of rat skin tissue (Scale bar: 80 μm). f Representative IF staining images of angiogenic markers CD31 (green), α-SMA (red) and Ki67 (pink) in diabetic wounds of different groups on day 14 (Scale bar: 50 μm). White arrows indicate CD31 and α-SMA double-positive vessels. g, h Quantitative analysis of granulation tissue width (g) and epithelial thickness (h) from rat skin tissue H&E staining on day 14. i Quantitative analysis of collagen deposition from rat skin tissue after different interventions on day 14. j Quantitative analysis of CD31+ vessels per unit area. k Quantitative analysis of mature blood vessels with CD31+/α-SMA+ per unit area. l Quantitative analysis of CD31+Ki67+ cell rate in diabetic wounds of different groups. m, n Serum EGF (m) and VEGF (n) secretion levels in different groups. o, p Representative IF staining images (o) and quantitative analysis (p) of CD86 (red) and CD206 (green) in diabetic wounds of different groups on day 14 (Scale bar: 50 μm). q–s ELISA analysis of TNF-α (q), IL-10 (r) and IL-6 (s) from the wound tissue lysates extracted at day 14 after treatment. G1, Control; G2, LIFU; G3, Gel; G4, BT@Gel; G5, BT@Gel+LIFU; G6, BT-dNO@Gel+LIFU. Data were presented as mean ± SD (n = 3 rats per group). Statistical significance was determined using a one-way ANOVA test followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison analysis. ns, not significant, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001 and ****P < 0.0001. Source data are provided as a Source Data file. Elements in (a) were created using templates from BioRender. Li, X. (2026) https://BioRender.com/vfilyre.

Back to article page