ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
A comparative study of wound healing kinetics, efficacy, and profiling of VG111 in canine wounds.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of naturally occurring canine wounds, such as bite and degloving injuries, remains a major veterinary challenge because standard treatments often struggle to balance infection control and tissue regeneration. Although povidone-iodine (PI) remains a widely used first-line antiseptic in both human and veterinary medicine, there are concerns regarding its potential for cytotoxicity and the inhibition of fibroblast growth, which can delay healing. To address these limitations, a prospective comparative study was conducted on 32 client-owned dogs at GADVASU in Ludhiana, where wounds were randomized into four treatment arms. The animals received either the novel natural product formulation VG111 or standard 5% PI, both with and without systemic cefotaxime. Clinical outcomes were assessed through wound contraction percentages and modified Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool (BWAT) scores at 5-day intervals. The results revealed that the VG111-only group achieved complete healing by day 25 nearly twice as fast as the PI group, which took up to 50 days. Interestingly, the addition of systemic cefotaxime to VG111 modestly delayed healing kinetics rather than accelerating them. In addition to clinical evaluation, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis was utilized to identify 41 chemical constituents within VG111. These chemical findings were further complemented by
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.