ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2026
In Vivo Evaluation of Lacticaseibacillus reuteri and Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus Lysates for Oral Wound Healing.
Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Distinct Molecular Mechanisms in Oral Mucosal Wound Healing: Translational Insights and Future Directions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of bacterial lysates derived from Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus and L. reuteri on oral wound healing in a rat model. Forty-eight female Wistar rats were randomly assigned to four groups: PBS (group A), L. rhamnosus lysate (group B), L. reuteri lysate (group C), and a combination of both (group D). Full-thickness 1×1 mm wounds were created on the buccal mucosa, and treatments (50 μg/mL) were applied topically every other day. Wound healing was assessed on days 3, 7, 14, and 21 through macroscopic evaluation, histological analysis (H&E staining), and measurement of wound length. On day 7, group D showed complete wound closure (0.00 ± 0.00 mm), significantly shorter than group A (0.99 ± 0.20 mm, P < 0.0001). Significant reductions were also observed in group C (P = 0.0093). By day 14, all probiotic-treated groups exhibited complete healing, while histological repair in group A remained incomplete. Microscopic evaluation confirmed improved epithelial restoration and mucosal architecture in treated groups, particularly in group D, which showed no scarring signs. These findings demonstrate that topical application of non-viable L. rhamnosus and L. reuteri lysates can accelerate oral wound healing in vivo. Further studies in microbiota-intact or inflamed models are needed to evaluate clinical relevance and underlying mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40482007What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.