Table 5.
Highlights of reviewed studies of electroactive agents in hydrogels for wound healing.
| Biomaterials | Electroactive agent | Concentration | Conductivity | In vivo | Main result | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chitosan-g-polyaniline (QCSP)/poly (ethylene glycol)-co-poly-glycerol sebacate (PEGS) | Polyaniline (PANI) | ⁓1.5 mg/mL | 2.25 mS/cm −3.5 mS/cm | + | Increased wound healing rate was observed for conductive hydrogels via acceleration in wound closure, higher granulation, and collagen formation and faster re-epithelialization compared to non-conductive wound healing dressings as control. Higher expression of VEGF, EGF and TGF-β genes which are involved in wound healing, were observed for wounds treated with conductive hydrogel. |
[143] |
| N-carboxyethyl chitosan (CEC) and oxidized hyaluronic acid-graft-aniline tetramer (OHA-AT) | Aniline tetramer | Theoretical AT content (%): 5, 10, 15, and 20. |
0.42 mS/cm | + | In vivo, hydrogel demonstrated antibacterial activity and promoted wound healing by increasing granulation tissue formation, fibroblast proliferation, and angiogenesis. | [165] |
| Methacrylated alginate (MAA) Silver nanowire (AgNW) |
Silver nanowire (AgNW) | 10% w/v AgNW, 3% w/v MAA | 1.54 × 105 S/m | + | ePatch helped wound healing in 7 days, re-epithelialized the skin, grew new blood vessels, regulated the immune response, and stopped infection. | [169] |