ArticleMarine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.)2026
Fish Scale-derived Chitooligosaccharide and Chitosan Hydrogels as Functional Biomaterials for Wound Healing.
Article in Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.), 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
Abstract
Chronic and poorly healing wounds require dressings that do more than provide coverage, but actively regulate infection, oxidative stress, and tissue repair. In this study, hydrogels formulated from fish-scale-derived low-molecular-weight chitosan and chitooligosaccharide (COS) were evaluated using integrated antimicrobial, antioxidant, and in vivo wound-healing analyses to assess their comparative therapeutic performance. Antimicrobial testing against Gram-positive bacteria (Bacillus subtilis and Micrococcus luteus) and Gram-negative bacteria (Aeromonas hydrophila and Klebsiella pneumoniae) showed that COS displayed stronger activity overall, with minimum inhibitory concentrations ranging from 0.156 to 1.25 mg/mL, compared with 0.313 to 1.25 mg/mL for chitosan. COS also showed a clearer bactericidal effect, particularly against the Gram-positive strains, whereas chitosan was predominantly bacteriostatic under the conditions tested. In antioxidant assays, COS demonstrated stronger hydroxyl radical and ABTS radical scavenging activity than chitosan, indicating a more favourable redox-modulating profile. Physicochemical analyses revealed differences in the swelling and degradation profiles of the two hydrogel formulations. In vivo, both hydrogels promoted wound contraction relative to untreated wounds, with COS exhibiting the more rapid response. The COS-treated group achieved complete mean wound contraction by day 14, accompanied by greater collagen-associated staining during subsequent histological assessment. By day 21, the collagen-associated percentages reached 95.71% in COS-treated wounds and 84.81% in chitosan-treated wounds. Immunohistochemical analysis further demonstrated temporal changes in TGF-β1 expression, with increased staining during the proliferative stage of wound repair. Collectively, these findings indicate favourable wound-healing performance of fish scale-derived COS hydrogel relative to chitosan hydrogel under the experimental conditions examined. The results support further investigation of fish scale-derived biopolymers as potential materials for wound dressing development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42902022What 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.