Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 17, 2026.

Anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings and skin wound healing

Can Huang, Lanlan Dong, Baohua Zhao and 6 more

Clinical and Translational Medicine · 2022 · Review · CC BY

doi:10.1002/ctm2.1094

Abstract

Hydrogels are promising and widely utilized in the biomedical field. In recent years, the anti‐inflammatory function of hydrogel dressings has been significantly improved, addressing many clinical challenges presented in ongoing endeavours to promote wound healing. Wound healing is a cascaded and highly complex process, especially in chronic wounds, such as diabetic and severe burn wounds, in which adverse endogenous or exogenous factors can interfere with inflammatory regulation, leading to the disruption of the healing process. Although insufficient wound inflammation is uncommon, excessive inflammatory infiltration is an almost universal feature of chronic wounds, which impedes a histological repair of the wound in a predictable biological step and chronological order. Therefore, resolving excessive inflammation in wound healing is essential. In the past 5 years, extensive research has been conducted on hydrogel dressings to address excessive inflammation in wound healing, specifically by efficiently scavenging excessive free radicals, sequestering chemokines and promoting M 1 ‐to‐M 2 polarization of macrophages, thereby regulating inflammation and promoting wound healing. In this study, we introduced novel anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings and demonstrated innovative methods for their preparation and application to achieve enhanced healing. In addition, we summarize the most important properties required for wound healing and discuss our analysis of potential challenges yet to be addressed.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 17, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

INTRODUCTION

As one of the most important organs of the human body, which protects us from harsh external environments, the skin is often damaged by traumas, severe burns, ulcers and various other injuries, thus disrupting its protective barrier functions and vital role in sensory perception. In addition, such injuries affect a patient's mental health and constitute an enormous societal economic burden., Therefore, identifying effective therapeutic strategies to promote wound healing is an extremely urgent requirement.

Wound healing process

When skin is damaged and a wound is formed, the body initiates the healing process, consisting mainly of haemostasis, inflammation, proliferation and remodelling., The haemostatic process involves some highly complex biological activities. First, the small blood vessels and capillaries around the wound reactively constrict to reduce local blood flow. Subsequently, the platelets are attracted to aggregate into blood clots by the exposed collagen fibres. Concomitantly, the platelets will release vasoactive substances, such as 5‐hydroxytryptamine and prostaglandins, which further constrict blood vessels and slow blood flow. Meanwhile, the phospholipids and adenosine diphosphate released by platelets will attract more platelets to aggregate into blood clots. Finally, the endogenous and exogenous coagulation processes are initiated.,,

The followed stage is the inflammatory phase. The inflammatory response is characterized by increased vascular permeability and activated inflammatory cells, such as monocytes, lymphocytes and neutrophils, migrating to the wound in response to chemokines. The inflammatory mediators and inflammatory cells are essential for the removal of necrotic tissue and foreign bodies, and initiation and regulation of wound repair.,,

The proliferative phase, closely linked to the inflammatory phase, is a prerequisite for re‐establishing skin barrier function.,, The main cells, involved in the process of skin reconstruction, are keratinocytes, fibroblasts and vascular endothelial cells. These cells accomplish wound epithelial regeneration, neovascularization and granulation tissue formation through their proliferation and migration activity.

The remodelling phase, involving the maturation and reconstruction of nascent tissues, is the final stage of wound healing., The maturation process mainly includes the degradation of excess collagen fibres by collagenase, rearrangement of collagen and regression of overgrown capillaries, which may last for months to years. Ultimately, the granulation tissue formed in wound healing evolves into normal connective tissue.,

Numerous endogenous and exogenous adverse factors can disrupt the physiological healing processes, among which the inflammatory phase is the most susceptible to interference. Wound tissue produces various proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines at the initial step in the inflammatory phase, which results in the infiltration of neutrophils and macrophages at injured sites. Neutrophils are required to remove debris and digest invading bacteria through phagocytosis, releasing caustic proteolytic enzymes and producing free radicals in the process of their cleansing activities. Additional cells present in wound sites include macrophages, which mediate angiogenesis, fibroplasia and extracellular matrix (ECM) production, thereby bridging the inflammatory and proliferative phases. Importantly, moderate inflammation facilitates the removal of necrotic tissue, kills local bacteria and promotes wound healing. However, excessive inflammatory infiltration interferes with normal healing events, such as collagen deposition, angiogenesis and granulation tissue formation. Therefore, it is imperative for inflammation in the wound to be precisely modulated at a level suitable to promote wound healing yet prevented from reaching a level that impedes it.

Hydrogel dressings

Unlike traditional dressings, such as bandages and gauzes, hydrogel dressings are widely acknowledged for their excellent properties, including mechanical properties that are compatible with biological tissues and exceptional water retention capacity which can keep the wound moist and continuously absorb exudate. In addition, their opportune biodegradation avoids secondary damage during dressing replacement, making them ideal wound dressing materials.,,, Furthermore, compared to other emerging dressings, such as foam and films, hydrogels possess a three‐dimensional porous network structure similar to that of a natural ECM, providing a framework for cells to proliferate and migrate. More importantly, hydrogel dressings can be structurally and biochemically designed and functionally integrated to acquire various advantageous properties,,,,, of which anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings are foremost representatives. Some commercial hydrogel dressings in wound healing are summarized in Table 1.

In recent years, reactive oxygen species (ROS), chemokines and macrophage phenotypes have been at the centre of research on targeting excessive inflammation in wounds.,,,, Natural or synthetic polymers are combined by physical or chemical cross‐linking methods to present different functions and properties. Physical cross‐linking mainly includes hydrophobic association, hydrogen bonding and ionic interactions. The polymers are connected by covalent bonds in chemical cross‐linking, including disulphide, a Schiff base and borate ester bond., The cross‐linking methods depend on the nature of the polymers. Some cross‐linking methods in hydrogel dressings are summarized in Table 2. By integrating drugs, small bioactive molecules and novel biomaterials into a hydrogel matrix, anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings can scavenge excessive free radicals, sequester chemokines and promote M1‐to‐M2 polarization of macrophages, thereby resolving excessive inflammation in the wound and thus promoting wound healing. Over the past 5 years, intensive research has been conducted on anti‐inflammatory hydrogels, but there has been no comprehensive review of anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings. Here, we present an overview highlighting the recent achievements in anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings, from preparation mechanisms to application methods in wound healing. Categories of anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings are based on the specific mechanisms of anti‐inflammatory activities for which hydrogel dressings are created, for example scavenging excessive ROS, sequestering chemokines and promoting M1‐to‐M2 polarization of macrophages (Figure 1).

SCAVENGING EXCESSIVE ROS

Radical derivatives of O2 are known as ROS, well‐known members of which include hydroxyl radicals (•OH), superoxide anion (•O2 −), peroxide (•O2 −2), hydroxyl ions (OH−) and peroxide (•O2 −2)., Low concentrations of ROS have been demonstrated to facilitate the wound healing., For example, as secondary messengers of inflammatory cells during wound healing, ROS coordinate the recruitment of lymphocytes to a wound, as demonstrated in the ability of a 10 μM concentration of H2O2 to act as a chemotactic agent for inflammatory cells, a function that is independent of blood‐bound signal components. In addition, ROS regulate angiogenesis and optimize blood perfusion into the wound‐healing area, and 100 μM concentration of H2O2 can stimulate angiogenesis via VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) signalling. Furthermore, a burst of ROS induced by phagocytes play a significant role in host defence against invading microorganisms.

However, adverse factors in a wound, such as hyperglycaemia and severe infection, bring a persistent infiltration of inflammatory cells, predominantly neutrophils and macrophages that produce large amounts of ROS with detrimental effects. In addition, antioxidant capacity is inherently limited in tissues and, when it is relatively deficient, ROS will destroy the structure of DNA, proteins and cell membrane lipids, leading to cell damage and apoptosis., Thus, tissue damage activates a cascade of inflammatory responses, which induces oxidative stress causing persistent inflammatory infiltration, thus initiating a vicious cycle that results in advancing the deterioration of the wound environment.,, Therefore, there is an urgent need for effective strategies to scavenge excessive ROS in wounds.

Recently, various antioxidant components introduced into hydrogels individually or integrated into multifunctional hydrogels through simple combinations, modifications and polymerizations have functioned successfully in scavenging excessive ROS in wounds effectively facilitating wound healing. Depending on their nature, these components are classified into five categories: natural polyphenols, polysaccharides, amino acids, synthetic polymers and new metal nanomaterials. The following is an elaboration according to the antioxidant components in the hydrogel dressings summarized in Table 3.

Natural polyphenols

The phenolic hydroxyl groups of natural polyphenols can stabilize ROS through hydrogen shift and electron transfer reactions. In addition, these groups of natural polyphenols chelate transition metals, protect and activate antioxidant enzymes and inhibit oxidative enzymes from resisting oxidative stress. Furthermore, it is worth noting that some natural polyphenols possess outstanding antimicrobial activity. Natural polyphenols mainly comprise flavonoids (quercetin, geranin, catechin, catechol, curcumin etc.) and acid ester polyphenols (ferulic acid, gallic acid, tannic acid, derived esters etc.) (Figure 2).,,

Curcumin (Cur), the main active ingredient of turmeric, possesses potent anti‐infective, antioxidant and anti‐inflammatory activities, which is a promising agent for topical use on wounds. di Luca et al. constructed a multifunctional composite prepared by combining hydrogels loaded with curcumin and microparticle systems containing the antimicrobial polyphenol, quercetin. The final composite hydrogel system was demonstrated to reduce H2O2‐induced oxidative cell stress and proliferation of methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus. In addition, Yang et al. introduced a thione group into a carboxymethyl chitosan (CS) hydrogel, and the resulting hydrogel significantly accelerated the wound healing process by inhibiting oxidative cell damage.

Resveratrol, a polyphenolic antioxidant compound, is promising in wound healing for its excellent capacity for modulating tissue regeneration, production of cytokines and insulin sensitivity. Comotto et al. functionalized an alginate dressing with the natural antioxidants curcumin and resveratrol to enhance its anti‐inflammatory and antibacterial action. The antioxidant compounds functioned as antibacterial agents and improved cell viability.

Gallic acid, an important phenolic compound, possesses unique properties, including anti‐inflammatory, antimicrobial and free radical scavenging activities. Thi et al. created an injectable hydrogel by introducing the antioxidant gallic acid–conjugated gelatin into a gelatin–hydroxyphenyl propionic hydrogel. The antioxidant hydrogel scavenged hydroxyl radicals and 1′‐diphenyl‐2‐picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radicals, efficiently accelerating the wound healing process.

Ferulic acid, a hydroxycinnamic acid present in the plant cell wall, is a natural antioxidant. Wei et al. prepared an antioxidant supramolecular hydrogel based on feruloyl‐modified peptides and glycol CS through a mild laccase‐mediated cross‐linking reaction. The prepared feruloyl antioxidant hydrogel enhanced the regeneration of the epithelium and connective tissue.

Tannic acid, a natural polyphenol derived from plants, has been widely employed in biomaterial design, including surface functionalization, protein modification and cross‐linking of biomaterials. For example, Li et al. introduced tannic acid into a bilayer hydrogel, forming a dual cross‐linked network and endowing the hydrogel with adhesive properties, antibacterial activity and antioxidant capacity. The resulting hydrogel significantly accelerated collagen deposition, facilitated the expression of VEGF and decreased tumour necrosis factor‐α (TNF‐α) levels.

In recent years, natural polyphenols have been widely recognized for their biomedical applications. However, the low utilization rate from raw materials and lack of stability in hydrogels limit their development. These aspects still need to be improved for better application in the bioengineering field.

Polysaccharides

Polysaccharides, comprising repeating units of monosaccharides, are widely applied in medical domains, including drug delivery, wound dressing, tissue engineering and bioimaging. The structure of polysaccharides, rich in hydroxyl and carboxyl groups, forms the basis of hydrogen shift and electron transfer reactions. Polysaccharides exert antioxidant effects through the following two strategies: (1) scavenging free radicals directly or indirectly and (2) increasing the activity of antioxidant enzymes or decreasing the activity of oxidative enzymes.,,, Meanwhile, polysaccharides can interact with a wide range of biomolecules (nucleic acids, proteins and phospholipids), providing ample scope for the design of hydrogel applications that incorporate their specific beneficial, wound healing attributes.,

Dextran, a natural polysaccharide produced by bacteria, possesses excellent water retention capacity, acts as a mild scavenger of ROS and reduces platelet hyperactivation. Qiu et al. constructed a zwitterionic dextran–based hydrogel utilizing carboxybetaine dextran and sulfobetaine dextran. The prepared hydrogel dressing showed a faster healing rate than both natural dextran hydrogels and a commercial wound dressing (DuoDERM film) due to its excellent antioxidant capacity.

Alginate, extracted from seaweed species, has been widely utilized in biomedical field for their high biocompatibility., Oh et al. fabricated oxidized alginate and gelatin hydrogels loaded with chitooligosaccharide and salicylic acid conjugates synthesized by grafting polymerization. The resulting hydrogel exhibited improved antioxidant activity and thus accelerated wound healing process. In addition, Lei et al. constructed hydrogels utilizing paramylon derived from Euglena gracilis with intrinsic antioxidant and anti‐inflammatory properties. The prepared hydrogel could effectively resolve wound inflammation and facilitate angiogenesis to promote wound healing.

For their excellent biocompatibility and extensive interactions with biomolecules, polysaccharides are currently combined with various antioxidant components to prepare hydrogels that are more conducive to clinical applications.

Amino acids and peptides

Various amino acids and peptides can react directly with ROS owing to abundant functional groups, such as amino, hydroxyl, carboxyl and sulphur bonds. In particular, the antioxidant effect of amino acids containing phenolic hydroxyl or sulfhydryl groups is more pronounced. In addition, these amino acid functional groups present the possibility of cross‐linking and grafting modification with hydrogels.

Arginine, an essential amino acid in humans, assumes enormous importance in cell physiology. The carbon–nitrogen double bond in the guanidine group of arginine endows it with antioxidant properties.,, Zhang et al. developed novel hydrogels (HA‐DA/AD) by introducing arginine derivatives (AD) into dopamine‐functionalized hyaluronic acid (HA‐DA). The HA‐DA/AD hydrogel showed greater DPPH and hydroxyl radical scavenging rates and better wound healing outcomes than simple HA‐DA hydrogels. Although researchers have attempted to integrate amino acids with hydrogel systems, the molecular mechanism of free radical scavenging of amino acids has not been clearly elucidated, which provides a direction for subsequent research.

Silk fibroin peptide, hydrolysate of silk fibroin obtained from the silkworm cocoons, possesses significant antioxidant properties. Liu et al. prepared an injectable HMSC hydrogel loaded with tetramethylpyrazine based on silk fibroin peptide–grafted hydroxypropyl CS and oxidized microcrystalline cellulose. The resulting hydrogel exhibited excellent antioxidant capability and accelerated wound healing process while impeding scar formation.

Pearl peptides, extracted from pearl powder, have strong antioxidant and antibacterial properties. Liu et al. designed pearl peptide–loaded antioxidant hydrogels utilizing selenium‐containing block‐functionalized polyethylene glycol (PEG)/Polypropylene glycol polymers. The pearl peptide hydrogels improved skin fibroblast viability, reduced oxidative stress of cells and promoted angiogenesis in wound healing.

Most of these natural materials in hydrogels mentioned earlier have good biocompatibility, but their high enzymatic degradability and low physical and chemical stabilities are a major obstacle to widespread biomedical applications. These properties are particularly important concern in natural materials, which may be resolved by synthetic polymer materials.

Synthetic polymer materials

Over the years, researchers have been inspired to design polymeric materials with excellent properties to compensate for the shortcomings of natural active ingredients., Zhao et al. developed an ROS‐scavenging hydrogel by utilizing polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) cross‐linked by an ROS‐responsive linker. The resulting hydrogel decreased the ROS level and upregulated M2 phenotype macrophages in wounds (Figure 3). Zhang et al. designed a multifunctional hydrogel combining polyacrylic acid (PAA) formed by the cross‐linking polymerization of acrylic acid with an arginine‐based unsaturated polyamide polyesteramide (PEA) through a photopolymerization reaction. The PAA/PEA hybrid hydrogel possessed high hygroscopicity and antioxidant properties, allowing it to absorb and interact with exudates, thereby scavenging ROS.

Several studies have shown that dopamine‐like substances with abundant catechol groups on their surfaces are considered good scavengers of ROS. The catechol moiety confers antioxidant capacity to dopamine, which scavenges ROS in a dose‐dependent manner., Hussain et al. developed a dopamine‐substituted multidomain peptide with strong skin adhesion, antimicrobial activity and antioxidant capacity. The dopamine‐substituted multidomain peptide hydrogel significantly shortened the inflammatory phase of the healing process.

Puerarin, a natural plant extract, is characterized by its excellent antioxidant capacity for inhibiting cellular damage and lipid peroxidation. As a complementary therapeutic drug, puerarin is applied with dopamine on wounds to accelerate the healing process. Herein, Zhang et al. prepared a polydopamine/puerarin nanoparticle–incorporated PEG diacrylate hybrid hydrogel with antioxidant properties. The prepared hydrogel presented excellent cell proliferation and accelerated regeneration in a whole‐layer skin defect model.

Synthetic polymer materials have overcome some weaknesses of natural active ingredients, but their poor biocompatibility and complex preparation procedures impede their further development. Perhaps an effective combination of natural and synthetic materials would be a better choice, such as PEG and heparin.

Novel metal nanomaterials

Interestingly, it has been discovered that specific metals and their oxides possess antioxidant properties when fabricated into nanomaterials. Selected metal oxide nanoparticles, such as CeO2, behave as antioxidant enzymes, that is, nanozymes in pathological conditions, such as superoxide dismutase, catalase and glutathione peroxidase. Nanozymes have substantial catalytically active surface atoms and thus are highly active, whereas natural enzymes usually have only one active centre, thus making them more efficient in catalytic reactions than natural enzymes.,,,

Selenium nanoparticles (SeNPs) are attractive for their prominent anticancer, antiviral and antibacterial activities and significant anti‐inflammatory and antioxidant properties in wound healing.,,, Mao et al. constructed several multifunctional nanocomposite hydrogel dressings based on bacterial cellulose (BC), gelatin (Gel) and SeNPs. The decoration of SeNPs endowed the hydrogel with superior antibacterial activity and outstanding antioxidant and anti‐inflammatory properties. In addition, the BC/Gel/SeNPs hydrogel showed excellent performance in skin wound healing.

Nano CeO2 has attracted wide attention in nanomedicine due to its extensive applications in drug delivery, biosensing and medicine. Meanwhile, CeO2 nanoparticles with outstanding biocompatibility are relatively stable and environmentally friendly. Ahmed et al. employed a method for the rapid and environmentally friendly synthesis of CeO2 nanoparticles from extracts of yellow marshmallow root (Althaea officinalis). A CS hydrogel film, which incorporated the green synthesized cerium oxide nanoparticles, showed high antioxidant activities and antibacterial effects, significantly enhancing wound healing. In addition, Peng et al. developed a composite hydrogel, including Cu5.4O ultrasmall nanozymes, for scavenging ROS and star polyethylene glycol (StarPEG) and heparin for sequestering chemokines. The hydrogel dressing effectively adsorbed the inflammatory chemokines (monocyte chemotactic protein‐1 [MCP‐1] and interleukin‐8 [IL‐8]), suppressing the massive migration of inflammatory cells. In addition, it scavenged ROS from wound exudate, reducing oxidative stress by the sustained release of Cu5.4O.

The novel metal and its compound nanomaterials represent a new direction for the development of antioxidant hydrogels. Opportunities that have appeared to date offer a small view towards many materials yet to be discovered for the enhancement of wound healing.

Chemokines

Chemokines, a small family of cytokines, were first identified as substances that aid leukocyte recruitment to sites of injury or infection, thereby releasing soluble factors to influence the wound healing process. Most chemokine amino acid sequences contain four conserved cysteine residues. According to the polypeptide chain cysteine location, chemokines are classified into four subclasses: C, CC, CXC and CX3C (C indicates cysteine, and X indicates any amino acid), most of which belong to the CC and CXC families. Among them, CXC chemokines are further subdivided according to the presence of glutamate–leucine–arginine (ELR) motifs in front of the first cysteine residue. ELR (+) chemokines promote angiogenesis, and ELR (−) chemokines are deemed to possess an angiostatic effect.

Chemokines interact with cells through G protein‐coupled seven‐transmembrane receptors (Figure 4). One type of receptor can bind to multiple chemokines, and the same chemokine can interact with several different types of receptors, allowing chemokines to play important roles in the pathobiological processes of chronic inflammation, tumourigenesis and autoimmune diseases., Involved in all phases of wound healing (haemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, remodelling), chemokines can influence wound healing events, such as angiogenesis, collagen deposition and re‐epithelialization.,, However, persistent chemokine hyperfiltration in wounds has been reported to lead to poor wound healing.,, Therefore, therapeutic strategies targeting excessive proinflammatory chemokines in wounds have been constantly upgraded, and potential approaches to target chemokines include monoclonal antibodies, small‐molecule antagonists and glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) that interfere with the distribution of chemokines. GAG‐based anti‐inflammatory hydrogels are among the most prominent wound‐healing therapeutic strategies. Hydrogels are prepared by flexibly utilizing various biomimetic materials based on the principle of interaction between GAGs and chemokines to capture excessive proinflammatory chemokines from wounds to promote wound healing.

Glycosaminoglycan hydrogel dressings in wound healing

GAGs, a family of negatively charged linear polysaccharides, are widely found on the surface of human cells and in the ECM. Capable of interacting with various proteins, including cytokines, growth factors, proteases and chemokines, GAGs mediate physiological processes, such as cell adhesion and intracellular signal transduction. In addition, GAGs participate in multiple diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative diseases and tumours, through the electrostatic interactions between positively charged amino acid residues and negatively charged sulphate groups.

In complex wounds (such as diabetic and burn wounds), persistent and excessive inflammatory cells infiltration produces massive amounts of proinflammatory chemokines, such as MCP‐1 and IL‐8, which further aggravate the invasion of inflammatory cells into the wound bed, thereby perpetuating chronic inflammation.109, One important feature of chemokines is their ability to bind to ECM GAGs, a process mediated by the electrostatic interaction described earlier. It has been demonstrated that the significant GAG‐binding motif on chemokines is usually BBXB or BBBXXBX, where B and X represent basic and any amino acid, respectively. In addition, specific chemokine‐binding epitopes on GAG have been identified, such as the 2‐O‐sulphate group on the allulose unit. Accordingly, the sulphation pattern of GAGs governs multiple binding events, such as the distribution of chemokines within the ECM, controlling immune cells activation and migration.,,

Lohmann et al. customized a modular hydrogel based on StarPEG and GAG heparin derivatives to achieve maximal chemokine sequestration. As a result, the inflammatory chemokines IL‐8, macrophage inflammatory protein 1 and MCP‐1 in wound fluids were effectively scavenged, inhibiting the migration of human monocytes and neutrophils. In addition, the resulting hydrogel showed better performance than the standard‐of‐care product PROMOGRAN with respect to granulation tissue formation, angiogenesis and wound closure in a delayed wound healing model. Similarly, Schirmer et al. developed a wound contact layer based on a StarPEG‐GAG hydrogel. The composite wound contact layer dampened excessive inflammatory signals without affecting the levels of pro‐regenerative growth factors, promoting wound healing by increasing granulation tissue formation, vascularization and deposition of collagen fibres (Figure 5).

Additionally, Qin et al. prepared a hydrogel that mimics the ECM, consisting of an HA‐derived component with anti‐inflammatory activity and a gelatin‐derived component with adhesion sites for cell anchoring. The results showed that the HA‐Gel hydrogel was a viable therapeutic option for full‐thickness wounds by effectively depleting the proinflammatory chemokine MCP‐1 in the wound bed.

However, the function of chemokines in wounds is extraordinarily complex. The anti‐inflammatory hydrogel is not intended to sequester or remove all chemokines but to target and sequester chemokines that are detrimental, such as MCP‐1 and IL‐8, thereby promoting wound healing. Conversely, loading special chemokines that facilitate wound healing into hydrogel dressings can accelerate the wound healing process. Xu et al. customized a biomimetic hydrogel utilizing PVA and CS as hybrid materials while loaded with chemotactic factor (SDF‐1) to stimulate a rapid in situ recruitment of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) for rapid wound repair and regeneration. The doped chemokines can be consistently released from the hydrogel and significantly recruit BMSCs in vitro and in vivo. The hydrogel‐based biomimetic PVA/CS hybrids for the local release of chemokines are a promising vehicle to improve healing outcomes without causing scar formation or any other adverse complications.

In fact, based on electrostatic interactions, negatively charged polysaccharides will inevitably deplete some positively charged soluble proteins that facilitate wound healing, such as VEGF. How to dampen this side effect is an urgent issue that needs to be addressed. The sulphation degree and concentration of GAGs in hydrogels maybe a possible research direction.

Macrophages

Macrophages play a vital role in recognizing and removing pathogens, cellular debris and phagocytosis of apoptotic neutrophils in the early stages of wound healing and enhancing angiogenesis, collagen deposition and epithelial cell migration in the later stages. Macrophages in the skin are classified into two categories depending on their origin: (1) resident macrophage populations formed before birth and (2) monocytes recruited to the injured area from the circulatory system and then differentiating into macrophages. The first group of macrophages consists of self‐renewing cells produced by the embryonic yolk sac. Monocyte‐derived macrophages initially migrate to injured areas via damage‐associated molecular pattern or pathogen‐associated molecular pattern signalling. In addition, monocytes are also recruited through damaged blood vessels., Depending on the role of macrophages in wound healing, they are classified into proinflammatory macrophages (M1) and anti‐inflammatory macrophages (M2). This classification is still controversial, as the origin of anti‐inflammatory macrophages (M2), the method of phenotypic transition from M1 to M2 and the relative proportions of each in macrophage populations all remain obscure. However, it is important to analyse the functions of different types of macrophages in wound healing. Proinflammatory macrophages (M1) produce ROS, nitric oxide, IL‐6, TNF‐α, matrix metalloproteinase 9 and so on to recognize and remove pathogens, cellular debris and apoptotic neutrophils in the early stages. Anti‐inflammatory macrophages (M2) exert their effects in the proliferative and remodelling phases of wound healing. They bring high levels of growth factors (platelet‐derived growth factor, insulin‐like growth factor 1 etc.), metalloproteinase inhibitor 1, arginase 1 (Arg‐1) and so on to promote angiogenesis, collagen deposition and epithelial cell migration and to minimize fibrosis and remodel the ECM.,,, Similar to the overlap of stages in wound healing, some macrophages share proinflammatory and anti‐inflammatory phenotypes and may even exert other effects as well.

Polarization of macrophages in wound healing

The polarization of macrophages is highly dependent on the wound microenvironment, which is dynamic during the healing process, thus affecting the phenotype and functions of macrophages. Adverse factors, such as hyperglycaemia and bacterial infections, impede the polarization of proinflammatory macrophages (M1) to anti‐inflammatory macrophages (M2). The wound then remains in the inflammatory phase, impairing epithelial regeneration, collagen deposition and angiogenesis and hindering the wound from shifting to the repair phase. Therefore, how to promote the polarization of the persistent proinflammatory macrophages (M1) in wounds becomes a critically urgent problem.

In recent years, various dressings have been designed to regulate the microenvironment of chronic wounds with an expectation of promoting macrophage polarization in the later stages of wound healing. Among them, hydrogel dressings have attracted the greatest attention. Hydrogels can be designed to immunomodulate chronic wounds by delivering bioactive molecules, including antimicrobial molecules, immunomodulatory components, growth factors, genes and cells, promoting the polarization of M1 macrophages to M2, thus accelerating the wound healing process. Selected bioactive molecules for use in hydrogel dressings are summarized in Table 4.

Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), secreted by mesenchymal stem cells, can promote the polarization of M1 macrophages to alleviate inflammation and accelerate the skin wound healing process., Zhang et al. incorporated PGE2 into a CS hydrogel (CS + PGE2 hydrogel). The experimental results showed that the controlled release of PGE2 attenuated the inflammatory response by inducing the polarization of M1 macrophages to M2, and the CS + PGE2 hydrogel could modulate the balance between the three overlapping phases of inflammation, regeneration and remodelling in wound healing.

Lactic acid–producing bacteria, the most commonly utilized probiotics, have great effects on protecting the host against microorganisms harmful to the human body, strengthening the host immune system and reducing metabolic disorders. Lu et al. designed a heparin–poloxamer thermoresponsive hydrogel incorporating a delivery system comprising living Lactococcus. The lactic acid secreted by the living, probiotic system can induce M2 phenotypic transformation of macrophages, significantly promoting angiogenesis in diabetic wounds, and the resulting hydrogel can also produce and protect VEGF, increasing proliferation, migration and tube formation of endothelial cells (Figure 6).

Modifying the original dressing via physical or chemical approaches may enhance the functions of hydrogel applications. For example, Das et al. utilized a modified collagen gel dressing, shifting macrophages towards an anti‐inflammatory phenotype and attenuating inflammatory responses. The resulting hydrogel can change wound inflammation outcomes by increasing the production of anti‐inflammatory IL‐10, IL‐4 and proangiogenic VEGF.

Meanwhile, paeoniflorin, the main bioactive component of the total glucoside extracted from peony, can control macrophage activity.,,, Yang et al. prepared a high molecular weight HA‐based hydrogel loaded with paeoniflorin extracted from Paeonia lactiflora. The constructed hydrogel dressing significantly promoted the polarization of macrophages from M1 to M2, and this result was accompanied by improved inflammation, angiogenesis, re‐epithelialization and collagen deposition.

As a small molecule signal transduction motif, H2S exerts a therapeutic effect by penetrating the cell membrane, and one of the mechanisms of its therapeutic effect is to promote the phenotypic transformation of macrophages to M2 macrophages.,, Herein, Wu et al. incorporated a pH‐controllable H2S donor (JK1) into an HA‐based biomimetic hydrogel, thereby constructing a hybrid system. The resulting hybrid hydrogel can facilitate the polarization of proinflammatory macrophages (M1) to anti‐inflammatory macrophages (M2), significantly accelerating the wound regeneration process through increased re‐epithelialization, vascularization and deposition of collagen fibres on dermal wounds.

Bioactive glass, a group of materials consisting of SiO2, CaO, Na2O and P2O5, is a remarkable bioactive material widely applied in clinical practice for tissue transplantation. The ion products of bioactive glass have been demonstrated to activate the M2 phenotype of macrophages and stimulate the secretion of more anti‐inflammatory growth factors by macrophages. Zhu et al. explored the function of the bioactive glass/sodium alginate hydrogel and showed that it could induce the polarization of the M2 phenotype and upregulate the expression of anti‐inflammatory genes. In addition, M2‐polarized macrophages further recruited fibroblasts and endothelial cells, enhancing the synthesis of fibroblast ECM and vascularization of endothelial cells.

Gene delivery is considered a versatile alternative strategy, of which the main aim is to immunomodulate the phenotype of macrophages, increase anti‐inflammatory cytokine expression, reduce the secretion of proinflammatory cytokines and enhance the recruitment of Treg cells to suppress inflammation. Here, Saleh et al. developed adhesive hydrogels containing miR‐223 5p mimic (miR‐223*) to control the polarization of macrophages in wounds. These hydrogels demonstrated the upregulation of miR‐223* in J774A.1 macrophages, increased the expression of the anti‐inflammatory gene Arg‐1 and decreased the production of proinflammatory markers, including TNF‐α, IL‐1β and IL‐6.

The level of inflammation in wounds is dynamic, and the phenotype of macrophages varies according to the wound microenvironment. Macrophages display different phenotypes to perform various roles during the wound healing process. They exhibit a proinflammatory M1 phenotype in the early inflammatory stages and an anti‐inflammatory M2 phenotype in the repair stages. A phenotypic continuum may exist during the process, with some cells sharing the phenotypic characteristics of M1 and M2 macrophages. The phenotypic regulation of macrophages is a sophisticated process. Insufficient M1 macrophages in the early stages may lead to severe infection or delayed wound healing, whereas excessive M2 macrophages in the later stages may result in scar formation. However, current dressings lack the ability to precisely modulating the phenotype of macrophages to achieve predictably ideal results. In addition, few studies on hydrogels have uncovered the molecular mechanisms of macrophage polarization, which is of great significance for the precise regulation of macrophage activity in wound healing. Therefore, more research is needed to solve this major issue.

CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES

The regulation of inflammation in wounds is complex. Insufficient inflammation levels in the early stages and excessive inflammation infiltration in later stages both lead to the disruption of the healing process, with the latter being more common in wound healing. Therefore, various advanced anti‐inflammatory biomaterials have been used in wound healing in recent years, especially in treating chronic wounds. Among them, anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings can chemically, mechanically and electrically mimic skin functions and, thus, have attracted considerable attention. This review summarizes the scope of emerging anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings, focusing on three required aspects of wound healing: scavenging excessive free radicals, sequestering chemokines and promoting M1‐to‐M2 polarization of macrophages. However, the development of anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings for enhanced wound healing is still in the early stages. These approaches also face unique challenges related to their biocompatibility, technology and clinical results, which must be addressed before the previous treatments can be transformed into clinical applications. Unfortunately, animal models for which treatments have been evaluated cannot fully replicate the complexity of chronic wound healing in humans, and human physiology is vastly distinct from that of the mouse. In addition, the safety of hydrogels must be evaluated carefully, as they may trigger inappropriate immune responses, such as infections, allergies and autoimmune diseases. Therefore, intensive research is needed to allow the creation of promising anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings for successful use in clinical applications.

In the future, anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings may afford opportunities for a precise modulation of wound healing processes, with real‐time monitoring of wound inflammation levels using wearable sensors and imaging devices, perhaps with automated stimulus responsiveness and other technologies to adjust therapeutic strategies. Such advances in the development of precise treatment of wounds will improve patient curing rates, alleviate pain and reduce costs. Meanwhile, anti‐inflammatory hydrogels may also be loaded with other functional components, such as haemostatic, conductive and adhesive materials, making anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings more powerful and predictable for clinical applications, which is a vitally important subject in translational research, particularly in the use of advanced anti‐inflammatory hydrogel dressings. Translational research may generate clinically meaningful outcomes in wound healing that improve human health and allow fundamental scientific findings to be translated more efficiently into practical applications. Clearly, this will require the concerted efforts of a wide range of researchers and clinicians, but the outcomes can be transformative.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References 155

  1. 1.

    Dąbrowska AK, Spano F, Derler S, et al. The relationship between skin function, barrier properties, and body‐dependent factors. Skin Res Technol. 2018;24(2):165‐174

    Not in our library10.1111/srt.12424

  2. 2.
  3. 3.

    Rahimnejad M, Derakhshanfar S, Zhong W. Biomaterials and tissue engineering for scar management in wound care. Burns Trauma. 2017;5:4

    Not in our library10.1186/s41038-017-0069-9

  4. 4.
  5. 5.

    Han G, Ceilley R. Chronic wound healing: a review of current management and treatments. Adv Ther. 2017;34(3):599‐610

    Not in our library10.1007/s12325-017-0478-y

  6. 6.

    Patrulea V, Ostafe V, Borchard G, et al. Chitosan as a starting material for wound healing applications. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2015;97(pt B):417‐426

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ejpb.2015.08.004

  7. 7.

    Wang PH, Huang BS, Horng HC, et al. Wound healing. J Chin Med Assoc. 2018;81(2):94‐101

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jcma.2017.11.002

  8. 8.

    Zhang M, Zhao X. Alginate hydrogel dressings for advanced wound management. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020;162:1414‐1428

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.07.311

  9. 9.

    Almadani YH, Vorstenbosch J, Davison PG, et al. Wound healing: a comprehensive review. Semin Plast Surg. 2021;35(3):141‐144

    Not in our library10.1055/s-0041-1731791

  10. 10.
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
  15. 15.

    Kasuya A, Tokura Y. Attempts to accelerate wound healing. J Dermatol Sci. 2014;76(3):169‐172

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jdermsci.2014.11.001

  16. 16.

    Hu H, Xu FJ. Rational design and latest advances of polysaccharide‐based hydrogels for wound healing. Biomater Sci. 2020;8(8):2084‐2101

    Not in our library10.1039/d0bm00055h

  17. 17.

    Liang Y, He J, Guo B. Functional hydrogels as wound dressing to enhance wound healing. ACS Nano. 2021;15:12687‐12722

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.1c04206

  18. 18.
  19. 19.

    Chen J, He J, Yang Y, et al. Antibacterial adhesive self‐healing hydrogels to promote diabetic wound healing. Acta Biomater. 2022;146:119‐130

    Not in our library10.1016/j.actbio.2022.04.041

  20. 20.
  21. 21.

    Wang H, Xu Z, Zhao M, et al. Advances of hydrogel dressings in diabetic wounds. Biomater Sci. 2021;9(5):1530‐1546

    Not in our library10.1039/d0bm01747g

  22. 22.
  23. 23.

    Liang Y, Li M, Yang Y, et al. pH/glucose dual responsive metformin release hydrogel dressings with adhesion and self‐healing via dual‐dynamic bonding for athletic diabetic foot wound healing. ACS Nano. 2022;16(2):3194‐3207

    Not in our library10.1021/acsnano.1c11040

  24. 24.

    Luo M, Wang Y, Xie C, et al. Multiple coordination‐derived bioactive hydrogel with proangiogenic hemostatic capacity for wound repair. Adv Healthc Mater. 2022;11:e2200722

    Not in our library10.1002/adhm.202200722

  25. 25.

    Xu Y, Patino Gaillez M, Rothe R, et al. Conductive hydrogels with dynamic reversible networks for biomedical applications. Adv Healthc Mater. 2021;10(11):e2100012

    Not in our library10.1002/adhm.202100012

  26. 26.

    Shu W, Wang Y, Zhang X, et al. Functional hydrogel dressings for treatment of burn wounds. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2021;9:788461

    Not in our library10.3389/fbioe.2021.788461

  27. 27.

    Dunnill C, Patton T, Brennan J, et al. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and wound healing: the functional role of ROS and emerging ROS‐modulating technologies for augmentation of the healing process. Int Wound J. 2017;14(1):89‐96

    Not in our library10.1111/iwj.12557

  28. 28.
  29. 29.

    Bilgen F, Ural A, Kurutas EB, et al. The effect of oxidative stress and Raftlin levels on wound healing. Int Wound J. 2019;16(5):1178‐1184

    Not in our library10.1111/iwj.13177

  30. 30.
  31. 31.

    Kim SH, Park JW. IDH2 deficiency impairs cutaneous wound healing via ROS‐dependent apoptosis. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 2019;1865(11):165523

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bbadis.2019.07.017

  32. 32.

    Chang M, Nguyen TT. Strategy for treatment of infected diabetic foot ulcers. Acc Chem Res. 2021;54(5):1080‐1093

    Not in our library10.1021/acs.accounts.0c00864

  33. 33.
  34. 34.

    Xu Q, Venet M, Wang W, et al. Versatile hyperbranched poly(β‐hydrazide ester) macromers as injectable antioxidative hydrogels. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2018;10(46):39494‐39504

    Not in our library10.1021/acsami.8b15006

  35. 35.

    Konat GW. H2O2‐induced higher order chromatin degradation: a novel mechanism of oxidative genotoxicity. J Biosci. 2003;28(1):57‐60

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02970132

  36. 36.

    Stadtman ER, Levine RL. Free radical‐mediated oxidation of free amino acids and amino acid residues in proteins. Amino Acids. 2003;25(3‐4):207‐218

    Not in our library10.1007/s00726-003-0011-2

  37. 37.

    He Z, Xu Q, Newland B, et al. Reactive oxygen species (ROS): utilizing injectable antioxidative hydrogels and ROS‐producing therapies to manage the double‐edged sword. J Mater Chem B. 2021;9(32):6326‐6346

    Not in our library10.1039/d1tb00728a

  38. 38.

    Xu Z, Han S, Gu Z, et al. Advances and impact of antioxidant hydrogel in chronic wound healing. Adv Healthc Mater. 2020;9(5):e1901502

    Not in our library10.1002/adhm.201901502

  39. 39.

    Annabi N, Tamayol A, Uquillas JA, et al. 25th anniversary article: rational design and applications of hydrogels in regenerative medicine. Adv Mater. 2014;26(1):85‐123

    Not in our library10.1002/adma.201303233

  40. 40.

    Aguiar B, Carmo H, Garrido J, et al. In vitro evaluation of the photoreactivity and phototoxicity of natural polyphenol antioxidants. Molecules. 2021;27(1):189

    Not in our library10.3390/molecules27010189

  41. 41.

    Sharifi S, Fathi N, Memar MY, et al. Anti‐microbial activity of curcumin nanoformulations: new trends and future perspectives. Phytother Res. 2020;34(8):1926‐1946

    Not in our library10.1002/ptr.6658

  42. 42.

    Boonyong C, Vardhanabhuti N, Jianmongkol S. Natural polyphenols prevent indomethacin‐induced and diclofenac‐induced Caco‐2 cell death by reducing endoplasmic reticulum stress regardless of their direct reactive oxygen species scavenging capacity. J Pharm Pharmacol. 2020;72(4):583‐591

    Not in our library10.1111/jphp.13227

  43. 43.
  44. 44.

    Zhang S, Xu M, Zhang W, et al. Natural polyphenols in metabolic syndrome: protective mechanisms and clinical applications. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(11):6110

    Not in our library10.3390/ijms22116110

  45. 45.

    Li X, Ye X, Qi J, et al. EGF and curcumin co‐encapsulated nanoparticle/hydrogel system as potent skin regeneration agent. Int J Nanomed. 2016;11:3993‐4009

    Not in our library10.2147/ijn.s104350

  46. 46.

    di Luca M, Curcio M, Valli E, et al. Combining antioxidant hydrogels with self‐assembled microparticles for multifunctional wound dressings. J Mater Chem B. 2019;7(27):4361‐4370

    Not in our library10.1039/c9tb00871c

  47. 47.

    Yang C, Chen Y, Huang H, et al. ROS‐eliminating carboxymethyl chitosan hydrogel to enhance burn wound‐healing efficacy. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:679580

    Not in our library10.3389/fphar.2021.679580

  48. 48.

    Gokce EH, Tuncay Tanrıverdi S, Eroglu I, et al. Wound healing effects of collagen‐laminin dermal matrix impregnated with resveratrol loaded hyaluronic acid‐DPPC microparticles in diabetic rats. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2017;119:17‐27

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ejpb.2017.04.027

  49. 49.

    Comotto M, Saghazadeh S, Bagherifard S, et al. Breathable hydrogel dressings containing natural antioxidants for management of skin disorders. J Biomater Appl. 2019;33(9):1265‐1276

    Not in our library10.1177/0885328218816526

  50. 50.

    Hosseinzadeh A, Houshmand G, Goudarzi M, et al. Ameliorative effect of gallic acid on sodium arsenite‐induced spleno‐, cardio‐ and hemato‐toxicity in rats. Life Sci. 2019;217:91‐100

    Not in our library10.1016/j.lfs.2018.11.050

  51. 51.

    Thi PL, Lee Y, Tran DL, et al. In situ forming and reactive oxygen species‐scavenging gelatin hydrogels for enhancing wound healing efficacy. Acta Biomater. 2020;103:142‐152

    Not in our library10.1016/j.actbio.2019.12.009

  52. 52.

    Mathew S, Abraham TE. Ferulic acid: an antioxidant found naturally in plant cell walls and feruloyl esterases involved in its release and their applications. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2004;24(2‐3):59‐83

    Not in our library10.1080/07388550490491467

  53. 53.

    Wei Q, Duan J, Ma G, et al. Enzymatic crosslinking to fabricate antioxidant peptide‐based supramolecular hydrogel for improving cutaneous wound healing. J Mater Chem B. 2019;7(13):2220‐2225

    Not in our library10.1039/c8tb03147a

  54. 54.

    Shi W, Kong Y, Su Y, et al. Tannic acid‐inspired, self‐healing, and dual stimuli responsive dynamic hydrogel with potent antibacterial and anti‐oxidative properties. J Mater Chem B. 2021;9(35):7182‐7195

    Not in our library10.1039/d1tb00156f

  55. 55.

    Li Y, Fu R, Zhu C, et al. An antibacterial bilayer hydrogel modified by tannic acid with oxidation resistance and adhesiveness to accelerate wound repair. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces. 2021;205:111869

    Not in our library10.1016/j.colsurfb.2021.111869

  56. 56.

    El‐Naggar ME, Othman SI, Allam AA, et al. Synthesis, drying process and medical application of polysaccharide‐based aerogels. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020;145:1115‐1128

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.10.037

  57. 57.

    Huang G, Mei X, Hu J. The antioxidant activities of natural polysaccharides. Curr Drug Targets. 2017;18(11):1296‐1300

    Not in our library10.2174/1389450118666170123145357

  58. 58.

    Wang H, Liu YM, Qi ZM, et al. An overview on natural polysaccharides with antioxidant properties. Curr Med Chem. 2013;20(23):2899‐2913

    Not in our library10.2174/0929867311320230006

  59. 59.

    Liu Y, Sun Y, Huang G. Preparation and antioxidant activities of important traditional plant polysaccharides. Int J Biol Macromol. 2018;111:780‐786

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.01.086

  60. 60.

    Mei X, Yi C, Huang G. Preparation methods and antioxidant activities of polysaccharides and their derivatives. Mini Rev Med Chem. 2017;17(10):863‐868

    Not in our library10.2174/1389557517666170116114657

  61. 61.

    Huang WM, Liang YQ, Tang LJ, et al. Antioxidant and anti‐inflammatory effects of Astragalus polysaccharide on EA.hy926 cells. Exp Ther Med. 2013;6(1):199‐203

    Not in our library10.3892/etm.2013.1074

  62. 62.

    Volpi N, Tarugi P. Influence of chondroitin sulfate charge density, sulfate group position, and molecular mass on Cu2+‐mediated oxidation of human low‐density lipoproteins: effect of normal human plasma‐derived chondroitin sulfate. J Biochem. 1999;125(2):297‐304

    Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.jbchem.a022286

  63. 63.

    Giese EC, Gascon J, Anzelmo G, et al. Free‐radical scavenging properties and antioxidant activities of botryosphaeran and some other β‐D‐glucans. Int J Biol Macromol. 2015;72:125‐130

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2014.07.046

  64. 64.

    Qiu X, Zhang J, Cao L, et al. Antifouling antioxidant zwitterionic dextran hydrogels as wound dressing materials with excellent healing activities. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2021;13(6):7060‐7069

    Not in our library10.1021/acsami.0c17744

  65. 65.
  66. 66.

    Arlov O, Rutsche D, Korayem MA, et al. Engineered sulfated polysaccharides for biomedical applications. Adv Funct Mater. 2021;31(19):2010732

    Not in our library10.1002/adfm.202010732

  67. 67.

    Oh GW, Kim SC, Kim TH, et al. Characterization of an oxidized alginate‐gelatin hydrogel incorporating a COS‐salicylic acid conjugate for wound healing. Carbohydr Polym. 2021;252:117145

    Not in our library10.1016/j.carbpol.2020.117145

  68. 68.

    Lei H, Zhao J, Li H, et al. Paramylon hydrogel: a bioactive polysaccharides hydrogel that scavenges ROS and promotes angiogenesis for wound repair. Carbohydr Polym. 2022;289:119467

    Not in our library10.1016/j.carbpol.2022.119467

  69. 69.

    Park EY, Murakami H, Matsumura Y. Effects of the addition of amino acids and peptides on lipid oxidation in a powdery model system. J Agric Food Chem. 2005;53(21):8334‐8341

    Not in our library10.1021/jf058063u

  70. 70.

    Li Y, Huang G, Zhang X, et al. Magnetic hydrogels and their potential biomedical applications. Adv Funct Mater. 2013;23(6):660‐672

    Not in our library10.1002/adfm.201201708

  71. 71.

    Wu J, Mutschler MA, Chu CC. Synthesis and characterization of ionic charged water soluble arginine‐based poly(ester amide). J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2011;22(3):469‐479

    Not in our library10.1007/s10856-011-4243-5

  72. 72.

    Stechmiller JK, Childress B, Cowan L. Arginine supplementation and wound healing. Nutr Clin Pract. 2005;20(1):52‐61

    Not in our library10.1177/011542650502000152

  73. 73.

    Zhang SH, Hou JY, Yuan QJ, et al. Arginine derivatives assist dopamine‐hyaluronic acid hybrid hydrogels to have enhanced antioxidant activity for wound healing. Chem Eng J. 2020;392:123775

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cej.2019.123775

  74. 74.

    Min L, Liu M, Liu L, et al. Enzymatic synthesis of quaternary ammonium chitosan‐silk fibroin peptide copolymer and its characterization. Int J Biol Macromol. 2018;109:1125‐1131

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.11.108

  75. 75.

    Liu S, Zhao Y, Wei H, et al. Injectable hydrogels based on silk fibroin peptide grafted hydroxypropyl chitosan and oxidized microcrystalline cellulose for scarless wound healing. Colloids Surf, A: Physicochem Eng Aspects. 2022;647:129062

    Not in our library10.1016/j.colsurfa.2022.129062

  76. 76.

    Yang YL, Chang CH, Huang CC, et al. Anti‐inflammation and anti‐apoptosis effects of pearl extract gel on UVB irradiation HaCaT cells. Biomed Mater Eng. 2015;26(suppl 1):S139‐S145

    Not in our library10.3233/bme-151299

  77. 77.

    Liu M, Chen Y, Zhu Q, et al. Antioxidant thermogelling formulation for burn wound healing. Chem Asian J. 2022;17(16):e202200396

    Not in our library10.1002/asia.202200396

  78. 78.

    Zhao H, Huang J, Li Y, et al. ROS‐scavenging hydrogel to promote healing of bacteria infected diabetic wounds. Biomaterials. 2020;258:120286

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120286

  79. 79.

    Zhang J, Hu J, Chen B, et al. Superabsorbent poly(acrylic acid) and antioxidant poly(ester amide) hybrid hydrogel for enhanced wound healing. Regen Biomater. 2021;8(2):rbaa059

    Not in our library10.1093/rb/rbaa059

  80. 80.

    Zhao W, Wang H, Han Y, et al. Dopamine/phosphorylcholine copolymer as an efficient joint lubricant and ROS scavenger for the treatment of osteoarthritis. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2020;12(46):51236‐51248

    Not in our library10.1021/acsami.0c14805

  81. 81.

    Zhao H, Zeng Z, Liu L, et al. Polydopamine nanoparticles for the treatment of acute inflammation‐induced injury. Nanoscale. 2018;10(15):6981‐6991

    Not in our library10.1039/c8nr00838h

  82. 82.

    Hussain M, Suo H, Xie Y, et al. Dopamine‐substituted multidomain peptide hydrogel with inherent antimicrobial activity and antioxidant capability for infected wound healing. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2021;13(25):29380‐29391

    Not in our library10.1021/acsami.1c07656

  83. 83.

    Li W, Lu M, Zhang Y, et al. Puerarin attenuates the daunorubicin‐induced apoptosis of H9c2 cells by activating the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway via the inhibition of Ca2+ influx. Int J Mol Med. 2017;40(6):1889‐1894

    Not in our library10.3892/ijmm.2017.3186

  84. 84.

    Zhang S, Ou Q, Xin P, et al. Polydopamine/puerarin nanoparticle‐incorporated hybrid hydrogels for enhanced wound healing. Biomater Sci. 2019;7(10):4230‐4236

    Not in our library10.1039/c9bm00991d

  85. 85.

    Yadav S, Maurya PK. Biomedical applications of metal oxide nanoparticles in aging and age‐associated diseases. 3 Biotech. 2021;11(7):338

    Not in our library10.1007/s13205-021-02892-8

  86. 86.

    Hu M, Korschelt K, Daniel P, et al. fibrous nanozyme dressings with catalase‐like activity for H2O2 reduction to promote wound healing. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2017;9(43):38024‐38031

    Not in our library10.1021/acsami.7b12212

  87. 87.

    Yadi M, Mostafavi E, Saleh B, et al. Current developments in green synthesis of metallic nanoparticles using plant extracts: a review. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol. 2018;46(suppl 3):S336‐S343

    Not in our library10.1080/21691401.2018.1492931

  88. 88.
  89. 89.

    Geoffrion LD, Hesabizadeh T, Medina‐Cruz D, et al. Naked selenium nanoparticles for antibacterial and anticancer treatments. ACS Omega. 2020;5(6):2660‐2669

    Not in our library10.1021/acsomega.9b03172

  90. 90.

    Ramya S, Shanmugasundaram T, Balagurunathan R. Biomedical potential of actinobacterially synthesized selenium nanoparticles with special reference to anti‐biofilm, anti‐oxidant, wound healing, cytotoxic and anti‐viral activities. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2015;17(5):304‐305

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jtemb.2015.05.005

  91. 91.
  92. 92.
  93. 93.

    Mao L, Wang L, Zhang M, et al. In situ synthesized selenium nanoparticles‐decorated bacterial cellulose/gelatin hydrogel with enhanced antibacterial, antioxidant, and anti‐inflammatory capabilities for facilitating skin wound healing. Adv Healthc Mater. 2021;10(14):e2100402

    Not in our library10.1002/adhm.202100402

  94. 94.

    Deshpande S, Patil S, Kuchibhatla SVNT, et al. Size dependency variation in lattice parameter and valency states in nanocrystalline cerium oxide. Appl Phys Lett. 2005;87(13):133113

    Not in our library10.1063/1.2061873

  95. 95.

    Ahmed HE, Iqbal Y, Aziz MH, et al. Green synthesis of CeO2 nanoparticles from the abelmoschus esculentus extract: evaluation of antioxidant, anticancer, antibacterial, and wound‐healing activities. Molecules. 2021;26(15):4659

    Not in our library10.3390/molecules26154659

  96. 96.

    Peng Y, He D, Ge X, et al. Construction of heparin‐based hydrogel incorporated with Cu5.4O ultrasmall nanozymes for wound healing and inflammation inhibition. Bioact Mater. 2021;6(10):3109‐3124

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.02.006

  97. 97.

    Satish L. Chemokines as therapeutic targets to improve healing efficiency of chronic wounds. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(11):651‐659

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2014.0602

  98. 98.

    Ochoa O, Torres FM, Shireman PK. Chemokines and diabetic wound healing. Vascular. 2007;15(6):350‐355

    Not in our library10.2310/6670.2007.00056

  99. 99.

    Bodnar RJ. Chemokine regulation of angiogenesis during wound healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(11):641‐650

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2014.0594

  100. 100.

    Roy I, Evans DB, Dwinell MB. Chemokines and chemokine receptors: update on utility and challenges for the clinician. Surgery. 2014;155(6):961‐973

    Not in our library10.1016/j.surg.2014.02.006

  101. 101.

    Rees PA, Greaves NS, Baguneid M, et al. Chemokines in wound healing and as potential therapeutic targets for reducing cutaneous scarring. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(11):687‐703

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2014.0568

  102. 102.
  103. 103.
  104. 104.

    Martins‐Green M, Petreaca M, Wang L. Chemokines and their receptors are key players in the orchestra that regulates wound healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2013;2(7):327‐347

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2012.0380

  105. 105.

    Balaji S, Watson CL, Ranjan R, et al. Chemokine involvement in fetal and adult wound healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2015;4(11):660‐672

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2014.0564

  106. 106.

    Zgheib C, Xu J, Liechty KW. Targeting inflammatory cytokines and extracellular matrix composition to promote wound regeneration. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2014;3(4):344‐355

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2013.0456

  107. 107.

    Hamel DJ, Sielaff I, Proudfoot AE, et al. Chapter 4. Interactions of chemokines with glycosaminoglycans. Methods Enzymol. 2009;461:71‐102

    Not in our library10.1016/s0076-6879(09)05404-4

  108. 108.

    Shi D, Sheng A, Chi L. Glycosaminoglycan‐protein interactions and their roles in human disease. Front Mol Biosci. 2021;8:639666

    Not in our library10.3389/fmolb.2021.639666

  109. 109.

    Johnson Z, Proudfoot AE, Handel TM. Interaction of chemokines and glycosaminoglycans: a new twist in the regulation of chemokine function with opportunities for therapeutic intervention. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2005;16(6):625‐636

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cytogfr.2005.04.006

  110. 110.

    Lohmann N, Schirmer L, Atallah P, et al. Glycosaminoglycan‐based hydrogels capture inflammatory chemokines and rescue defective wound healing in mice. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(386):eaai9044

    Not in our library10.1126/scitranslmed.aai9044

  111. 111.
  112. 112.

    Qin X, Qiao W, Wang Y, et al. An extracellular matrix‐mimicking hydrogel for full thickness wound healing in diabetic mice. Macromol Biosci. 2018;18(7):e1800047

    Not in our library10.1002/mabi.201800047

  113. 113.

    Xu XH, Yuan TJ, Ye PW, et al. Construction of a biomimetic chemokine reservoir stimulates rapid in situ wound repair and regeneration. Int J Pharm. 2019;570:118648

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ijpharm.2019.118648

  114. 114.

    Mahdavian Delavary B, van der Veer WM, van Egmond M, et al. Macrophages in skin injury and repair. Immunobiology. 2011;216(7):753‐762

    Not in our library10.1016/j.imbio.2011.01.001

  115. 115.
  116. 116.

    Koh TJ, DiPietro LA. Inflammation and wound healing: the role of the macrophage. Expert Rev Mol Med. 2011;13:e23

    Not in our library10.1017/s1462399411001943

  117. 117.

    Vishwakarma A, Bhise NS, Evangelista MB, et al. Engineering immunomodulatory biomaterials to tune the inflammatory response. Trends Biotechnol. 2016;34(6):470‐482

    Not in our library10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.03.009

  118. 118.
  119. 119.

    Louiselle AE, Niemiec SM, Zgheib C, et al. Macrophage polarization and diabetic wound healing. Transl Res. 2021;236:109‐116

    Not in our library10.1016/j.trsl.2021.05.006

  120. 120.

    Chen S, Li R, Cheng C, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection alters the macrophage phenotype switching process during wound healing in diabetic mice. Cell Biol Int. 2018;42(7):877‐889

    Not in our library10.1002/cbin.10955

  121. 121.

    Kharaziha M, Baidya A, Annabi N. Rational design of immunomodulatory hydrogels for chronic wound healing. Adv Mater. 2021;33(39):e2100176

    Not in our library10.1002/adma.202100176

  122. 122.

    Németh K, Leelahavanichkul A, Yuen PS, et al. Bone marrow stromal cells attenuate sepsis via prostaglandin E(2)‐dependent reprogramming of host macrophages to increase their interleukin‐10 production. Nat Med. 2009;15(1):42‐49

    Not in our library10.1038/nm.1905

  123. 123.

    Zhang QZ, Su WR, Shi SH, et al. Human gingiva‐derived mesenchymal stem cells elicit polarization of M2 macrophages and enhance cutaneous wound healing. Stem Cells. 2010;28(10):1856‐1868

    Not in our library10.1002/stem.503

  124. 124.

    Zhang S, Liu Y, Zhang X, et al. Prostaglandin E2 hydrogel improves cutaneous wound healing via M2 macrophages polarization. Theranostics. 2018;8(19):5348‐5361

    Not in our library10.7150/thno.27385

  125. 125.

    Naghmouchi K, Belguesmia Y, Bendali F, et al. Lactobacillus fermentum: a bacterial species with potential for food preservation and biomedical applications. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2020;60(20):3387‐3399

    Not in our library10.1080/10408398.2019.1688250

  126. 126.

    Lu YF, Li HS, Wang J, et al. Engineering bacteria‐activated multifunctionalized hydrogel for promoting diabetic wound healing. Adv Funct Mater. 2021;31(48):2105749

    Not in our library10.1002/adfm.202105749

  127. 127.

    Das A, Abas M, Biswas N, et al. A modified collagen dressing induces transition of inflammatory to reparative phenotype of wound macrophages. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):14293

    Not in our library10.1038/s41598-019-49435-z

  128. 128.

    Sun Y, Dong Y, Jiang HJ, et al. Dissection of the role of paeoniflorin in the traditional Chinese medicinal formula Si‐Ni‐San against contact dermatitis in mice. Life Sci. 2009;84(11‐12):337‐344

    Not in our library10.1016/j.lfs.2008.12.023

  129. 129.

    Sun Y, Zhang J, Huo R, et al. Paeoniflorin inhibits skin lesions in imiquimod‐induced psoriasis‐like mice by downregulating inflammation. Int Immunopharmacol. 2015;24(2):392‐399

    Not in our library10.1016/j.intimp.2014.12.032

  130. 130.

    Zhang T, Zhu Q, Shao Y, et al. Paeoniflorin prevents TLR2/4‐mediated inflammation in type 2 diabetic nephropathy. Biosci Trends. 2017;11(3):308‐318

    Not in our library10.5582/bst.2017.01104

  131. 131.

    Ma Z, Chu L, Liu H, et al. Paeoniflorin alleviates non‐alcoholic steatohepatitis in rats: involvement with the ROCK/NF‐κB pathway. Int Immunopharmacol. 2016;38:377‐384

    Not in our library10.1016/j.intimp.2016.06.023

  132. 132.

    Yang H, Song L, Sun B, et al. Modulation of macrophages by a paeoniflorin‐loaded hyaluronic acid‐based hydrogel promotes diabetic wound healing. Mater Today Bio. 2021;12:100139

    Not in our library10.1016/j.mtbio.2021.100139

  133. 133.

    Miao L, Shen X, Whiteman M, et al. Hydrogen sulfide mitigates myocardial infarction via promotion of mitochondrial biogenesis‐dependent M2 polarization of macrophages. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2016;25(5):268‐281

    Not in our library10.1089/ars.2015.6577

  134. 134.

    Wallace JL, Wang R. Hydrogen sulfide‐based therapeutics: exploiting a unique but ubiquitous gasotransmitter. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2015;14(5):329‐345

    Not in our library10.1038/nrd4433

  135. 135.

    Dufton N, Natividad J, Verdu EF, et al. Hydrogen sulfide and resolution of acute inflammation: a comparative study utilizing a novel fluorescent probe. Sci Rep. 2012;2:499

    Not in our library10.1038/srep00499

  136. 136.

    Wu J, Chen A, Zhou Y, et al. Novel H2S‐releasing hydrogel for wound repair via in situ polarization of M2 macrophages. Biomaterials. 2019;222:119398

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2019.119398

  137. 137.

    Jones JR. Review of bioactive glass: from Hench to hybrids. Acta Biomater. 2013;9(1):4457‐4486

    Not in our library10.1016/j.actbio.2012.08.023

  138. 138.

    Dong X, Chang J, Li H. Bioglass promotes wound healing through modulating the paracrine effects between macrophages and repairing cells. J Mater Chem B. 2017;5(26):5240‐5250

    Not in our library10.1039/c7tb01211j

  139. 139.

    Zhu Y, Ma Z, Kong L, et al. Modulation of macrophages by bioactive glass/sodium alginate hydrogel is crucial in skin regeneration enhancement. Biomaterials. 2020;256:120216

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2020.120216

  140. 140.

    Saleh B, Dhaliwal HK, Portillo‐Lara R, et al. Local immunomodulation using an adhesive hydrogel loaded with miRNA‐laden nanoparticles promotes wound healing. Small. 2019;15(36):e1902232

    Not in our library10.1002/smll.201902232

  141. 141.
  142. 142.

    Aswathy SH, Narendrakumar U, Manjubala I. Commercial hydrogels for biomedical applications. Heliyon. 2020;6(4):e03719

    Not in our library10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03719

  143. 143.

    Patil PS, Fathollahipour S, Inmann A, et al. Fluorinated methacrylamide chitosan hydrogel dressings improve regenerated wound tissue quality in diabetic wound healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2019;8(8):374‐385

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2018.0887

  144. 144.

    Gao C, Xiao LP, Zhou JH, et al. Immobilization of nanosilver onto glycine modified lignin hydrogel composites for highly efficient p‐nitrophenol hydrogenation. Chem Eng J. 2021;403:126370

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cej.2020.126370

  145. 145.

    Wu X, Liu R, Lao TT. Therapeutic compression materials and wound dressings for chronic venous insufficiency: a comprehensive review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2020;108(3):892‐909

    Not in our library10.1002/jbm.b.34443

  146. 146.

    Hixon KR, Klein RC, Eberlin CT, et al. a critical review and perspective of honey in tissue engineering and clinical wound healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2019;8(8):403‐415

    Not in our library10.1089/wound.2018.0848

  147. 147.

    Rippon M, Davies P, White R. Taking the trauma out of wound care: the importance of undisturbed healing. J Wound Care. 2012;21(8):359‐360, 362, 364‐368

    Not in our library10.12968/jowc.2012.21.8.359

  148. 148.

    Gao Y, Peng K, Mitragotri S. Covalently crosslinked hydrogels via step‐growth reactions: crosslinking chemistries, polymers, and clinical impact. Adv Mater. 2021;33(25):e2006362

    Not in our library10.1002/adma.202006362

  149. 149.

    Eftekharizadeh F, Dehnavieh R, Noori Hekmat S, et al. Health technology assessment on super oxidized water for treatment of chronic wounds. Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2016;30:384. PMID: 27493928; PMCID: PMC4972067

    Not in our library

  150. 150.

    Dong X, Yao F, Jiang L, et al. Facile preparation of a thermosensitive and antibiofouling physically crosslinked hydrogel/powder for wound healing. J Mater Chem B. 2022;10(13):2215‐2229

    Not in our library10.1039/d2tb00027j

  151. 151.

    Ahmadian Z, Correia A, Hasany M, et al. A hydrogen‐bonded extracellular matrix‐mimicking bactericidal hydrogel with radical scavenging and hemostatic function for pH‐responsive wound healing acceleration. Adv Healthc Mater. 2021;10(3):e2001122

    Not in our library10.1002/adhm.202001122

  152. 152.

    Wang S, Yuan L, Xu Z, et al. Functionalization of an electroactive self‐healing polypyrrole‐grafted gelatin‐based hydrogel by incorporating a polydopamine@AgNP nanocomposite. ACS Appl Bio Mater. 2021;4(7):5797‐5808

    Not in our library10.1021/acsabm.1c00548

  153. 153.

    Tang A, Li Y, Yao Y, et al. Injectable keratin hydrogels as hemostatic and wound dressing materials. Biomater Sci. 2021;9(11):4169‐4177

    Not in our library10.1039/d1bm00135c

  154. 154.

    Xu Z, Liu G, Liu P, et al. Hyaluronic acid‐based glucose‐responsive antioxidant hydrogel platform for enhanced diabetic wound repair. Acta Biomater. 2022;147:147‐157

    Not in our library10.1016/j.actbio.2022.05.047

  155. 155.

    Qu J, Zhao X, Liang Y, et al. Antibacterial adhesive injectable hydrogels with rapid self‐healing, extensibility and compressibility as wound dressing for joints skin wound healing. Biomaterials. 2018;183:185‐199

    Not in our library10.1016/j.biomaterials.2018.08.044

Cited by papers we hold 1

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.