1.Introduction

       The skin is composed of three layers (epidermis, dermis, and hypodermis), and is considered the fifirst physical barrier against external infectious agents. Wounds are defifined as the disruption in the continuity of the skin, induced by mechanical, chemical, or thermal harms, and resulting in the loss of the defensive functions of this tissue [1].

       The wound-healing process has the purpose of recovering the integrity of the damaged tissue and the regeneration of the epithelium that was lost, and it is a dynamic and complex process that globally occurs in four overlapping steps: hemostasis, inflflammation, tissue proliferation, and regeneration [1,2] (Figure 1).

      The cascade of initial vasoconstriction of blood vessels and platelet aggregation play a key role in stopping the loss of blood. The initial vasoconstriction is followed by a vasodilation, which allows an inflflux of a variety of inflflammatory cells which release several types of mediators and cytokines to promote thrombosis, angiogenesis, and re epithelialization. In addition, the fifibroblasts release extracellular components which initiate the formation of collagen fifibers that will serve as scaffolding [1,3]. During the inflflammatory phase the hemostasis, chemotaxis, and the increased vascular permeability limit further damage, close the wound, remove cellular debris and bacteria, and promote cellular migration [3]. Afterwards, the proliferative phase implicates the formation of granulation tissue, re-epithelialization, and neovascularization, a process that can last from several weeks until some months, or even more time in the case of the existence of some comorbidities or particular patient situations [4]. In the end, during the maturation period,the new tissues are remodeled, the excess of collagen is reduced, and the wound contracts and reaches the maximum tensile strength [1].

       Acute wounds derived from unexpected accidents or surgical injury commonly heal within a predictable period depending on the size, depth, and extent of damage. Nevertheless, defificiencies in the wound-healing process cause more than 38 million patients with chronic wounds worldwide,which reaches epidemic epidemic proportions and causes a lareeconomic weight on helthcare systems[5].

       prolonged chronicity of wiounds is normally related to a bacterial injured-tissue colonization,which can progress into a bacterial resistance to topical and systemic antimicrobialagents,or into biofilm development,which complicates,in both cases,their treatment [6].In the end,this type of wound can cause sepsis and inflammation in organs and lead to increased morbidity and mortality.

      The clinical consideraions in wound-healing management include preventing and controlling the infection and/or contamination,maintaining the adequate moisture environment,treating edema and preventing further injury.Conventional biofilms,followed by wound dressing.The common wound dressings consist of a standard cotton bandage or highly absorbent dressings,such as collagen and alginatemor hydrocolloids;however,this procedure of wound care is often ineffective.Due to this need for new,efficient,and improved therapies,there has been a  revived interest in alternative treament approaches,such as honey.The management of wound healing has become the primary field of therapeutic application of this natural product[7,8].

       Honey has been used for wound healing since ancient times,mainly due to its antimicrobial activity.In addition to the broad spectrum of antibacterial activity gainset common wound-infecting mcroorganisms,honey has benn demonstrated to be effetive against bacteria with previously acquired resistance[8-10]. Furthermore,due to its several antimicrobial components and its different antibacterial acttion mechanisms,the development of honey is also related to its anti-inflammatory and antioxidant activaty,as well as its capacity to promote re-epithelialization and angiogenesis and stimulate skin and immune cells[13.14].All these mechanisms act together favoring the regeneration process of the damaged tissue.

       Several case studies and randomized controlled trials peovide considerable evidence of the effectiveness of honey in hesling different types of wounds,such as amputation wounds,burns,skin grafting sites,skin lesions,or skin ulcers including leg,varicose,malignant,diabetic,and sickle cell ulcers[15-18].

       The resolution time of wounds using honey or honey-derivates varies from some days to several months depending on the type, the depth, the anatomical location, and the chronicity of the wound [17,19]. Due to its osmotic effect, honey creates a liquid layer between the dressing and the wound bed. This liquid layer is an advantage in the removal and change of wound-dressings by reducing or eliminating the pain of this process and avoiding damage of the newly grown tissue, reducing the healing time [20].

       The use of honey obtained a remarkable improvement of recalcitrant wounds, and has demonstrated even more effificacy than conventional treatments using commercial wound dressings or antibiotics (systemic and topical) [19,21,22]. Honey rapidly replaces sloughs with granulation tissue and promotes a quick epithelialization and absorption of edema from around the ulcer margins, signifificantly reducing the healing time [19,23]. In addition, honey-based products showed excellent cytocompatibility with tissue cell cultures when compared with conventional treatments, such as silver dressings [24].

       Moreover, some studies demonstrated that the combination of honey with other compounds or in combination with conventional treatment can be benefificial for diabetic foot ulcer healing, reducing the wound-resolution time, the cost of the hospital stay, and the rate of amputation when compared to other conventional treatment [17].

       However, the use of honey by itself might present some limitations which are being overcome with the development of different honey formulations and honey wound dressings.

       This review aims to highlight the mechanism of honey’s action in wound healing and gather the literature available regarding the use of honey and modern engineering templates for promoting modern solutions for wound and skin healing and regeneration.

2.The Mechanisms of Honey in Wound and Burn Healing

       Honey is a natural and greatly complex substance with hundreds of compounds in its composition [8]. Honey bioactivity, and in consequence, its wound-healing potential, will be inflfluenced by its composition, which depends mainly on the flfloral source and other factors, such as seasonal, environmental, as well as processing, manipulation, packaging, and storage conditions [25,26]. In addition to some inherent characteristics, such as the acidity and the osmotic pressure, the healing properties of honey in diverse types of wounds and burns have also been attributed to other components which act through different mechanisms that work together to restore the structural integrity of the damaged tissues [6,18,27] (Figure 2).

2.1Antibacterial Effects

       Honey has been traditionally used in the prevention and treatment of wound infections [28,29]. However, with the arrival of antibiotics, the use of honey gradually decreased. Nowadays, microbial drug-resistance has become an increasingly common concern, and honey has regained the scientifific interest as an antibacterial agent [8,12,13]. Intrinsic characteristics of honey, such as high osmolarity, low water activity, and acidity, as well as some compounds, such as hydrogen peroxide, phenolic compounds, methylglyoxal, or bee defensin-1 peptide, directly affect the bacterial growth and survival [30–32]. In addition, honey shows an indirect antimicrobial action which involves the promotion of lymphocyte and antibody production, cytokines and immunomodulation, and nitric oxide(NO) [6,33–35].

      Non-healing wounds, as well as burns, present an elevated risk of infection, which might increase morbidity and mortality derived from sepsis and inflflammation in organs [13]. In addition, drug-resistant infections and wounds with biofifilms are particularlydiffificult to treat, since bacteria do not respond to the therapy or are protected by a selfproduced matrix of polysaccharide material [36].

      Several studies have demonstrated, in vitro and in vivo, the efficacy of different varieties of honey against a broad spectrum of bacteria, including those that commonly caused wound and burn infections, such as Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Acinetobacter baumannii, or Staphylococcus epidermidis [6,18,37–40]. In addition, honey has also been demonstrated to be effective against antibiotic-resistant bacteria [19,41–43],as well as against biofilms by preventing the formation and the development of the biofilm[31,44-47],by reducing the metabolic activity of already formed biofilms[44,48],or by altering the gene experssion of different genes related to the formation and the development of biofilms [48,49],and is related to the bacterial quorum sensing [49.50].

       Moreover, some studies demonstrated that manuka honey acts synergistically with several antibiotics,reducing the doses required to bacteroal growth or reverting the antibiotic resistance previously acquired[9,10,51,52].Thes results suggest a potential application of a combined therapy of honey and antibiotics.

 

2.2.Anti-Inflflammatory Effects

        Inflflammation is the response of a living tissue to a local injury and plays a fundamental role as a defense and protection mechanism to avoid infections and to repair the affected tissue. The inflflammatory phase is a necessary part of wound healing; however, when this response is not adequate, an overproduction of inflflammatory mediators by immune cells, which do not respond to initial triggers, might be produced, becoming a problem for wound resolution [53]. The anti-inflflammatory activity of honey is a consequence of different mechanisms.

        During the inflflammatory phase, the affected tissues release a high concentration of free radicals. The antioxidant compounds in honey act synergistically and can reduce the damage caused by these radicals, and therefore prevent tissue necrosis [14].

        In addition, in vitro and in vivo studies have demonstrated that honey reduces the activity of cyclooxygenases 1 and 2 (COX1 and COX2) that intervene in the synthesis of prostaglandins [54,55]. Prostaglandins participate in the inflflammatory response by producing vasodilation, increasing the permeability of blood vessels and allowing the passage of leukocytes, acting as an antiplatelet agent, and stimulating the nerve endings of pain. The reduction in prostaglandin concentration in plasma may induce a diminution of inflflammation, edema, and pain [56].

        Moreover, honey can inhibit the expression of tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α) and reduce the concentration of pro-inflflammatory cytokines through the attenuation of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) [54]. Furthermore, NF-κB is involved in the activation of the inducible NO synthase enzyme (iNO). During inflflammation, iNO is induced by cytokines, TNF-α, interleukins, and bacterial endotoxins, producing NO.

        NO is a free radical that acts as a mediator in acute and chronic inflflammation and favors the healing process of tissues. However, an excess of NO or an overproduction at the wrong time can be detrimental and contribute to the development of pathologies related to inflflammation [56].

       Another advantage of the anti-inflflammatory action of honey is the decrease in edema,thus reducing the pressure on the microvasculature of wound tissue that allows the availability of oxygen and nutrients required for growth of tissue and wound repair [20]. This effect also allows the control of the wounds’ exudate with an appropriate moisture balance,which is still a constant challenge in the healing processes [39].

       The anti-inflflammatory activity of honey has been mainly attributed to phenolic compounds [53,57]. However, until now, no correlation was found between the level of antiinflflammatory activity in different honey samples and the phenolic compound content [58],which might be due to the distinct types of interactions that can occur among these compounds and other compounds present in honey.

2.3.Antioxidant Activity

       The antioxidant activity of honey is due to a wide variety of compounds, such as flflavonoids, phenolic acids, tocopherols, ascorbic acid, and enzymes including catalase or superoxide dismutase [14,59,60]. In addition, melanoidins, products of the Maillard

reaction, were described as the main components responsible for the radical-scavenging capacity of honey [61,62]. These substances reduce the adverse effects of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS), inhibit the enzymes responsible for producing superoxide anions, act as metal chelators, and interfere in the chain reactions of free radicals and can play a preventative role in the process of their formation [63]. Through these antioxidant mechanisms, honey contributes to wound and burn healing by interfering with abnormal inflflammatory response [6]

       ROS act as messengers to give feedback amplifification of the inflflammatory response [20] and mediate TNF-α induced cytotoxicity [64]. Moreover, in chronic wounds, neutrophils and macrophages liberate high levels of ROS against invading bacteria [64]. The extended exposure to ROS causes cell damage of the tissue and might delay wound healing. In addition, the ROS formed in the inflflammatory phase of wound healing stimulate the activity of the fifibroblasts which produce the collagen fifibers of scar tissue. If the inflflammatory phase prolongates, it could induce hyper-granulation and fifibrosis, so honey minimizes or prevents hypertrophic scarring [14,64]. In addition, flflavonoids protect tissue against RNS, such as NO and peroxy-nitrite [65].

2.4.Debridement and Anti-Eschar Action

        Wound debridement is essential in producing the functional process of tissue reparation. The conventional procedure is the surgical remotion of dead tissue, which is painful, may cause infections, and produces toxins that can destroy the surrounding tissues [6,14,27].

       The moist environment produced by honey facilitates the wounds’ autolytic debridement process. The high osmotic pressure pulls out lymphatic flfluid from the deeper zones,which automatically remove dead, damaged, or infected scar tissue [27,39]. In addition,lymph is a rich source of proteases that activated by the hydrogen peroxide produced when honey is diluted and assists in the debriding activity [6].

       Additionally, honey inhibits the production of plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI) by the macrophages derived from its anti-inflflammatory activity [39]. PAI blocks the transformation of plasminogen, the enzymically inactive precursor of plasmin, into active plasmin. Plasmin is an enzyme that specififically digests fifibrin attached to the wound surface, but does not digest the collagen matrix, which is necessary for tissue reparation, thus preventing eschar formation [20,66]. Inflflammation increases the generation of PAI, so the mechanism through which honey decreases the production of PAI is probably related to its anti-inflflammatory activity [20].

2.5.Angiogenesis Promoter

        Angiogenesis occurs in the proliferative phase of wound healing. The development of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones supplies the required oxygen in the wound, which is an important stage in the healing process. This dynamic process is strongly regulated by signals from serum and the surrounding extracellular matrix environment [67]. Stimulation of angiogenesis by honey was demonstrated in an in vitro study with analogues of angiogenesis and an endothelial proliferation assay [68], and more recently, in another in vivo-model study [69].

       Hydrogen peroxide (generated from glucose by the action of the enzyme glucose oxidase present in raw honey) induces the recruitment of leukocytes to wounds through a concentration gradient mechanism. Due to an oxidant induct, macrophages release vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which stimulates angiogenesis [67]. In addition, the high concentration of sugars present in honey, as well as other minor constituents, such as amino acids, vitamins and trace elements, provide, in a moist environment, a local cellular energy source, which may improve local nutrition and endothelial cell proliferation [70–72].

       On the contrary, another study has demonstrated the anti-angiogenic activity of honey is mediated by the modulation of prostaglandin E2 and VEGF production [73]. This disparity among studies might be explained by the honey concentration tested, since the highest pro-angiogenic effect was found in a low concentration of honey, whereas higher concentrations demonstrated anti-angiogenic activity [68].

2.6.Immune System Promoter

       Some studies have also demonstrated the activity of honey in stimulating some immune system mediators. Honey can stimulate B- lymphocytes and T-lymphocytes and activate neutrophil phagocytosis in cell culture [20,74]. In addition, honey induces monocytes (MM6 cells) to secrete cytokines, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-1 (IL-1), and interleukin-6 (IL-6), which activate the immune response to infection [33–35].

       Moreover, honey stimulates antibody production during primary and secondary immune responses against thymus-dependent and thymus-independent antigens [75] and increases humoral immunity by the intrinsic NO, which activates specifific signal transduction pathways in monocytes in a concentration-dependent manner [76,77].

2.7.Healing-Rate Promoter

       In addition to all the honey effects previously described, honey acts in the regeneration of the new formed tissue, an essential step in the wound-healing process [78].

       The acidifification of the wound environment favors the action of macrophages, limits bacterial growth, and neutralizes the ammonia produced by bacterial metabolisms that could damage tissues [14]. However, the acidic pH of honey also limits the activity of proteases; these enzymes might inactivate the tissue growth factors and destroy the plasma fifibronectin and the collagen matrix, which are necessary for fifibroblast activity and tissue re-epithelialization [14,42]. In addition, the diminution of pH in the wound bed makes more oxygen available from hemoglobin in the blood [42].

       Furthermore, all the nutritious components present in honey (sugars, amino acids, vitamins, and other trace elements) stimulate cell growth and the development of repair tissues [70–72,79,80]. In addition, re-epithelialization would also be promoted by the increment of TNF-α and interleukin-1β (IL-1β) levels. A concentration of 1% of honey has been found to stimulate the release of the cytokine TNF-α, IL-1β and IL-6 from monocytes [81], which induce the keratinocyte migration and proliferation, which are the major cellular components that are involved in the intricate mechanisms of initiation, maintenance, and completion of wound healing, and may induce collagen synthesis by fifibroblasts [14,68,82].

3.Safety of Honey Used for Topical Treatment

       The extensive scientifific evidence proves that honey may offer distinct advantages over the chemotherapeutic substances currently used in the wound- and burn- healing processes. However, this natural product shows a series of limitations, and is not completely free from adverse effects.

       The composition of honey is rather variable, depending primarily on the botanical origin, and secondarily on other factors such as geographical origin, or harvesting, processing, and storage conditions [38,39]. This variability determines its bioactive properties, and consequently inflfluences the therapeutic effificacy of the wound treatment [39]. In addition, the absence of standardization and the incomplete knowledge of the active components, and the mechanisms through which they interact and act in wound healing, are the major limitations for the application of honey in medicine. For this reason, is essential to select the more appropriate varieties of honey, and it is recommended to carry out a previous screening [38].

       In addition, other considerations must be considered before honey application in wounds. The low pH, derived from the presence of organic acids in honey, may contribute to a stinging or burning sensation when it is applied to a damaged tissue [83]. Besides this unpleasant sensation, it is necessary to consider that, although minor, there is a risk of wound infection, mainly related to the presence of clostridial spores which have occasionally been found in honey [39,84]. This risk can be reduced by using gamma-irradiation, which inactivates the spores without modifying the original biological activity [85,86]. Nevertheless, no cases of wound infection due to clostridial spores related to the use of non-irradiated honey on wounds have been reported to date.

       Furthermore, the honey used for medical purposes must be free of any chemical contamination, such as pesticides, herbicides, or heavy metals. In this sense, to guarantee the maximum purity, honey should be collected in areas that meet the requirements for organic production, as well as following rigorous quality, processing and storage standards [8,19].In addition, is necessary to consider that some varieties of honey might present toxic active compounds originating from the nectar of species such as rhododendron, oleanders, mountain and sheep laurels, or azaleas. However, these effects have been described by honey ingestion [87,88].

4.Biomedical Application of Honey in Advanced Wound Care

4.1.Medical Grade Honey and Honey Ointments for Topical Application

       The safety threats previously described in wound treatment with honey are overcome by medical-grade honey approved for wound care [18,39]. Indeed, the medical-grade honeys are sterilized by gamma irradiation with the aim to kill Clostridium spores, produced under rigorous standards of hygiene, without pollutants or contaminating pesticides in its composition, and standardized under different defifined criteria [8]. They have potent in vitro bactericidal activity against antibiotic-resistant bacteria and are approved for application in wound management. Having reproducible antibacterial activity, these honeys are produced under controlled conditions in greenhouses (i.e., Revamil source honey); medical grade Leptospermum-derived Manuka honeys are analyzed individually by each batch to assess the Unique Manuka Factor (UMF) that gives a number based on its bactericidal activity [89]. Unlike other varieties, the antibacterial activity of Manuka honey is based on its non-peroxide activity related to compounds which are mainly present in this variety, such as methylglyoxal, leptosperin, or methyl syringate [38].

       Medical-grade honey can be directly applied to the wound bed and then covered with conventional dressing. However, in high-exuding wounds, honey can become less viscous and diluted. The liquid state of honey might complicate its application and its permanence on wound and burn environments, and in the treatment of excessively exudative lesions, honey might be diluted to concentrations that present minimal or no effects in short periods of time [7,39]. Nevertheless, according to [6], even when honey is heavily diluted by wound exudate, it will still have potent enough antibacterial activity to inhibit the growth of bacteria (the MIC values were found to be below 11%).

       In clinical practice today, several honey-based wound-care commercial preparations in the form of gels, ointment, and dressings, are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and registered as medical devices [90]. Most of them are formulated with medical-grade Manuka honey, since it is one of the most studied varieties of honey in the world, and it was the fifirst honey type to obtain the status of medical-grade honey. However, there are also alternatives that use other types of honey, such as buckwheat, multiflfloral, and Revamil source honey, among others [8]. For instance, a honey-based gel formula can be prepared with 100 % medical-grade honey without the addition of other ingredient (Table 1) or can be mixed with other agents(s) such as natural emollients (e.g.,lanolin, polyethylene glycol, glycerine, myristil myristrate) or different plant waxes and gelling agents [90].

       The FDA-approved honey-based devices are indicated in the treatment of different types of wounds, such as low and moderate-to-heavy exuding wounds, diabetic foot ulcers,leg ulcers, pressure ulcers, burns, traumatic wounds, surgical wounds, chronic wounds, or colonized acute wounds, among other indications [18]. Despite the availability of these products, their use in medical practice is still limited, probably due to the misconception that there is no evidence to support the use of honey with therapeutic purposes, as well as the scarce promotion and diffusion of honey products for wound care [20].

       Nevertheless, effectiveness of the MedihoneyTM Antibacterial Wound Gel has been evaluated in eight post-coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patients. The gel was selected as the active primary product of choice for all the graft wounds (seven of the eight patients had wound infections). The honey-based gel was applied directly onto the wound bed and covered with an adhesive-bordered non-adherent gauze dressing. The wounds all reduced in size and there was a signifificant reduction in pain, odor, and exudate. Moreover, the wound gel had reduced the bioburden of the wounds enabling them to progress to healing. Finally, the use of medical honey became a regular dressing choice within the authors’ cardiothoracic unit [91]. Moreover, the combined treatment with honey-based gels (L-Mesitran Soft) and ointment (L-Mesitran Ointment) has been successfully applied for treatment of infected ulcers in diabetics patients [19]. Indeed, the use of ointments help to entrap water, keep the skin moist, and provide an emollient protective fifilm, which are all crucial elements for wound healing [19,90], while the layer of gel fifights infections and optimizes wound healing [19,90].

       The medical-grade honey, as well as the ointments and gels, is applied to the wound bed and requires a secondary conventional dressing (e.g., cotton wool bandage) to contain the honey in the wound bed environment, which on removal cause pain [92].

       Therefore, recent research focuses on the development of different materials or matrices to convey honey, control its delivery, and act as absorbent secondary dressings [7,39,93–95].

4.2Honey-Based Advanced Wound Care Products

      Many years ago, wound management was based on covering the wound using conventional dressings (i.e., gauzes, absorbent cotton, bandages). However, they are limited in terms of inflfluencing/accelerating wound healing and preventing/treating infections. Currently, wound management has been updated due to a greater understanding of the molecular and cellular processes involved in wound healing. Additionally, with advancements in technology, the design and functionality of wound dressings has advanced in the direction of multi-functionality [96]. The modern dressings are designed to maintain the moist wound environment and promote healing [97]. Moreover, the critical necessities of modern wound dressings include biocompatibility, no cytotoxic effects, a rate of biodegradability directly proportional with the rate of formation of new tissue, a release of incorporated bioactive compounds (drugs), and the control of possible infections [96].

       Tissue engineering has recently introduced wound dressings/scaffolds as an alternative treatment of wounds with advanced properties, suitable for keeping a moist environment while absorbing exudates, creating a barrier against pathogens, and facilitating drug delivery systems [96].

       The recent in vitro and in vivo research demonstrated that honey is a valuable addition to many tissue-engineering templates in eliminating bacterial infection, aiding in inflflammation resolution and improving tissue integration with the template (Tables 2 and 3) [28]. Currently, hydrogels and electrospun nanofifibers are the most researched types of honey incorporated scaffolds [98].

4.2.1Honey-Based Hydrogels

       Hydrogels are high-water-content materials prepared from cross-linked polymers,such as chitosan, and can provide sustained, local delivery of a variety of therapeutic agents [106]. Incorporation of honey into the hydrogel system can benefificially affect the water absorption capacity of the polymer (of the hydrogel) and increase the antibacterial activity of the scaffold [99].

       Noori, Kokabi, and Hassan (2018) investigated a honey-loaded PVA/chitosan/mont morillonite nanocomposite (PCMH) hydrogel dressing as a drug model for wound healing. Results demonstrated the ability of the PCMH nanocomposite hydrogel to smart release honey against pH and temperature changes. The maximum release of honey from the hydrogel occurred at pH 7, while the minimum was at pH 2. Independently of the pH, increasing temperature caused higher honey release from the hydrogel matrix. However, the addition of the nanoclay (montmorillonite) to the hydrogel decreases the hydrogel swelling and delays the honey release. Nevertheless, the authors suggested that the honey loaded nanocomposite hydrogel could be used in low exudate wounds to supply optimized humidity in the wound bed [102].

       Different honey concentrations have different effificacies in the scavenging of free radicals and promoting epithelial cell proliferation [119]. It has been shown that the release of honey increases when increasing its concentration in hydrogel, regardless of the polymeric hydrogel used in the formulation. For instance, the honey 75%-chitosan formula showed the best healing properties (regeneration of the epidermis tissue and the formation of new blood capillaries) compared to honey hydrogel formulae with a lower concentration of honey (up to 50%, w/w). Similarly, an 80%-Manuka/PVA wound dressing hybrid hydrogel showed sustained release of honey over 24 h with progressively low adhesion to the wound bed that protects new epithelialization and promotes cell proliferation. Both dressings demonstrate the high value of cell viability and proliferation and promoted antibacterial activity, being suitable for wounds with moderate to relatively high exudate [100].

       Further, one of the advantages of using hydrogels instead of conventional designs is their transparency, which allows us to observe the status of the burn or wound without removal of the dressing [103]. In vivo study showed that burns treated with honey hydrogel sheets were completely healed after 12 days with intact epidermis and topical proliferation of hair follicles. In contrast, burns treated with commercial ointment (MEBO-treated burns) and non-treated burns presented 15% and 63% unclosed wound areas, respectively [104].

       In addition, hydrogel wound scaffolds containing honey do not function merely as coverage to provide a clean, moist environment for healing, but also directly contribute to enhanced tissue regeneration and recovery [104].

4.2.2Honey-Based Electrospun Nanofifiber Scaffolds

       In biomedical applications, the nanofifiber membranes prepared by electro-spinning are used in wound dressings, biosensing, tissue engineering scaffolds, artifificial organs, and drug delivery [114]. The formulation of the electrospun nanofifiber scaffolds contain proteinbased polymers, such as collagen, gelatin, and silk, or/and polysaccharide-based polymers such as chitosan, hyaluronic acid, and alginate. Prepared stirred polymeric solution is loaded into a syringe that is attached to a needle of which the tip exhibits voltage [120].

       The advantageous properties of nanofifibers are a large surface area to volume ratio,high porosity, and a very small pore size, which lead to high exudate absorption, better wound permeation, and prevention of further infection [112].

       The fabrication of honey-based electrospun nanofifibers increases interest due to the enhanced activity realized upon combining the advantages of the nanofifibrous structure, primarily the increased surface-to-volume ratio with the advantageous properties of honey(Table 3) [112].

       Wound healing scaffolds are expected to absorb body flfluids and maintain hydration, but without increasing infection of the biofifilm. Indeed, wounds with biofifilm fail to re-epithelialize, show vascular granulation tissue, and consist of recalcitrant microbes.Honey/PVA nanofifiber membranes were found to effectively decrease the biofifilm formation [113]. Manuka honey is effective against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria; however, results of honey scaffolds containing 1–20% Manuka/PCL nanofifibers indicated that the controlled release of smaller amounts of honey by the scaffold is more effective against Gram-negative-bacteria-infected wounds. Interestingly, opposite results have been found for high-concentration honey chitosan electrospun nanofifibers. The honey/PVA/chitosan membrane (30%:7%:3.5%) enhanced antibacterial activity against s. aureus (complete inhibition after 48 h with 30%: 7%:5.5 %) and showed poor antibacterial activity against the Gram-negative E. coli. Moreover, the scaffold showed high biocompatibility and low cytotoxicity effects [108].

5.Conclusions

      The use of honey for biomedical applications has gained special focus over the years, with the development of novel applications for this natural product, taking advantage of its unique chemical characteristics. Due to its characteristics, namely, low pH and water activity, it presents a good microbiological, enzymatic and (bio)chemical stability, which can be lost if not properly processed for safe use by means of keeping both functionality and microbiological safety. Thus, the design of proper honey processing methodologies is of utmost importance for its use. As reviewed, honey presents a very promising potential to be used in wound-healing processes, either by direct application, incorporated in fifibrous membranes, or in hydrogel, with very promising results in either in vitro and in vivo trials.Nonetheless, further research is needed to overcome the main challenges on the use of honey for biomedical applications.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, writing—original draft preparation, H.S., P.C.-F.; writing—review and editing, H.S., P.C.-F., J.M.F., M.E.T., M.S.D., C.A.P., L.M.E.; visualization, C.A.P.; Project administration, supervision, J.A.S., L.M.E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments: Thanks are due to the University of Aveiro and FCT/MCT for the financial support of LAQV-REQUIMTE research Unit (UIDB/50006/2020) through national funds and, where applicable, co-financed by the FEDER within the PT2020 Partnership Agreement, and for financing the PhD grant of Hana Scepankova (SFRH/BD/88133/2012) and Carlos A. Pinto (SFRH/BD/137036/2018).

Conflflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflflict of interest.

References

 

1.Kus, K.J.B.; Ruiz, E.S. Wound Dressings—A Practical Review. Curr. Dermatol. Rep. 2020, 9, 298–308. [CrossRef]

2.Khaleghverdi, S.; Karimi, A.; Soltani, R.; Zare, R. The Effect of Myrtus, Honey, Aloe Vera and Pseudomonas Phage Treatment on Infected Second Degree Burns: In Vivo Study. Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 2021, 11, 7422–7430. [CrossRef]

3.Bowden, L.G.; Byrne, H.M.; Maini, P.K.; Moulton, D.E. A Morphoelastic Model for Dermal Wound Closure. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 2016, 15, 663–681. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.Anderson, K.; Hamm, R.L. Factors That Impair Wound Healing. J. Am. Coll. Clin. Wound Spec. 2012, 4, 84–91. [CrossRef][PubMed]

5.Olsson, M.; Järbrink, K.; Divakar, U.; Bajpai, R.; Upton, Z.; Schmidtchen, A.; Car, J. The Humanistic and Economic Burden of Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review. Wound Repair Regen. 2019, 27, 114–125. [CrossRef]

6.Molan, P.; Rhodes, T. Honey: A Biologic Wound Dressing. Wounds 2015, 27, 141–151. [PubMed]

7.Rossi, M.; Marrazzo, P. The Potential of Honeybee Products for Biomaterial Applications. Biomimetics 2021, 6, 6. [CrossRef]

8.Combarros-Fuertes, P.; Fresno, J.M.; Estevinho, M.M.; Sousa-Pimenta, M.; Tornadijo, M.E.; Estevinho, L.M. Honey: Another Alternative in the Fight against Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria? Antibiotics 2020, 9, 774. [CrossRef]

9.Campeau, M.E.M.; Patel, R. Antibiofifilm Activity of Manuka Honey in Combination with Antibiotics. Int. J. Bacteriol. 2014,2014, 795281. [CrossRef]

10.Hayes, G.; Wright, N.; Gardner, S.L.; Telzrow, C.L.; Wommack, A.J.; Vigueira, P.A. Manuka Honey and Methylglyoxal Increase the Sensitivity of Staphylococcus Aureus to Linezolid. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2018, 66, 491–495. [CrossRef]

11.Lu, J.; Cokcetin, N.N.; Burke, C.M.; Turnbull, L.; Liu, M.; Carter, D.A.; Whitchurch, C.B.; Harry, E.J. Honey Can Inhibit and Eliminate Biofifilms Produced by Pseudomonas Aeruginosa. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 18160. [CrossRef]

12.Maddocks, S.E.; Jenkins, R.E. Honey: A Sweet Solution to the Growing Problem of Antimicrobial Resistance? Future Microbiol.2013, 8, 1419–1429. [CrossRef]

13.McLoone, P.; Tabys, D.; Fyfe, L. Honey Combination Therapies for Skin and Wound Infections: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dermatol. 2020, 13, 875–888. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14.Oryan, A.; Alemzadeh, E.; Moshiri, A. Biological Properties and Therapeutic Activities of Honey in Wound Healing: A Narrative Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Tissue Viability 2016, 25, 98–118. [CrossRef]

15.Jull, A.; Walker, N.; Parag, V.; Molan, P.; Rodgers, A. Randomized Clinical Trial of Honey-Impregnated Dressings for Venous Leg Ulcers. Br. J. Surg. 2008, 95, 175–182. [CrossRef]

16.Smaropoulos, E.; Cremers, N.A.J. Treating Severe Wounds in Pediatrics with Medical Grade Honey: A Case Series. Clin. Case Rep. 2020, 8, 469–476. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.Alam, F.; Islam, M.A.; Gan, S.H.; Khalil, M.I. Honey: A Potential Therapeutic Agent for Managing Diabetic Wounds. Evid. Based complement. Altern. Med. 2014, 2014, 169130. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.Hixon, K.R.; Klein, R.C.; Eberlin, C.T.; Linder, H.R.; Ona, W.J.; Gonzalez, H.; Sell, S.A. A Critical Review and Perspective of Honey in Tissue Engineering and Clinical Wound Healing. Adv. Wound Care 2019, 8, 403–415. [CrossRef]

19.Nair, H.K.R.; Tatavilis, N.; Pospíšilová, I.; Kuˇcerová, J.; Cremers, N.A.J. Medical-Grade Honey Kills Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria and Prevents Amputation in Diabetics with Infected Ulcers: A Prospective Case Series. Antibiotics 2020, 9, 529. [CrossRef]

20.Molan, P.C. The Evidence and the Rationale for the Use of Honey. Wound Pract. Res. 2011, 19, 204–220.

21.Güne¸s, Ü.Y.; E¸ser, I. Effectiveness of a Honey Dressing for Healing Pressure Ulcers. J. Wound Ostomy Cont. Nurs. 2007, 34, 184–190.[CrossRef]

22.Kamaratos, A.V.; Tzirogiannis, K.N.; Iraklianou, S.A.; Panoutsopoulos, G.I.; Kanellos, I.E.; Melidonis, A.I. Manuka Honey Impregnated Dressings in the Treatment of Neuropathic Diabetic Foot Ulcers. Int. Wound J. 2012, 11, 259–263. [CrossRef][PubMed]

23.Efem, S.E.E. Clinical Observations on the Wound Healing Properties of Honey. Br. J. Surg. 1988, 75, 679–681. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24.Du Toit, D.F.; Page, B.J. An in Vitro Evaluation of the Cell Toxicity of Honey and Silver Dressings. J. Wound Care 2009, 18, 383–389.[CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.Silvia, P.M.D.; Gauche, C.; Gonzaga, L.V.; Costa, A.C.O.; Fett, R. Honey: Chemical Composition, Stability and Authenticity. Food Chem. 2016, 196, 309–323. [CrossRef]

26.Combarros-Fuertes, P.; Valencia-Barrera, R.M.; Estevinho, L.M.; Dias, L.G.; Castro, J.M.; Tornadijo, M.E.; Fresno, J.M. Spanish Honeys with Quality Brand: A Multivariate Approach to Physicochemical Parameters, Microbiological Quality, and Floral Origin.J. Apic. Res. 2019, 58, 92–103. [CrossRef]

27.Yilmaz, A.C.; Aygin, D. Honey dressing in wound treatment: A systematic review. Complement. Ther. Med. 2020, 51, 102388.[CrossRef]

28.Martinotti, S.; Ranzato, E. Honey, Wound Repair and Regenerative Medicine. J. Funct. Biomater. 2018, 9, 34. [CrossRef]

29.Mcloone, P.; Warnock, M.; Fyfe, L. Honey: A Realistic Antimicrobial for Disorders of the Skin. J. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. 2016,49, 161–167. [CrossRef]

30.Albaridi, N.A. Antibacterial Potency of Honey. Int. J. Microbiol. 2019, 2019, 2464507. [CrossRef]

31.Proaño, A.; Coello, D.; Villacrés-Granda, I.; Ballesteros, I.; Debut, A.; Vizuete, K.; Brenciani, A.; Álvarez-Suarez, J.M. The Osmotic Action of Sugar Combined with Hydrogen Peroxide and Bee-Derived Antibacterial Peptide Defensin-1 Is Crucial for the Antibiofifilm Activity of Eucalyptus Honey. LWT 2021, 136, 110379. [CrossRef]

32.Peršuri´c, Ž.; Paveli´c, S.K. Bioactives from Bee Products and Accompanying Extracellular Vesicles as Novel Bioactive Components for Wound Healing. Molecules 2021, 26, 3770. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

33.Abuharfeil, N.; Al-Oran, R.; Abo-Shehada, M. Food and Agricultural Immunology The Effect of Bee Honey on the Proliferative Activity of Human B-and T-Lymphocytes and the Activity of Phagocytes. Food Agric. Immunol. 1999, 11, 169–177. [CrossRef]

34.Tonks, A.J.; Cooper, R.A.; Jones, K.P.; Blair, S.; Parton, J.; Tonks, A. Honey Stimulates Inflflammatory Cytokine Production from Monocytes. Cytokine 2003, 21, 242–247. [CrossRef]

35.Tonks, A.; Cooper, R.A.; Price, A.J.; Molan, P.C.; Jones, K.P. Stimulation of TNF-α Release in Monocytes by Honey. Cytokine 2001,14, 240–242. [CrossRef]

36.Vestby, L.K.; Grønseth, T.; Simm, R.; Nesse, L.L. Bacterial Biofifilm and Its Role in the Pathogenesis of Disease. Antibiotics 2020,9, 59. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

37.Molan, P.C. Honey: Antimicrobial Actions and Role in Disease Management. In New Strategies Combating Bacterial Infection; Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2009; pp. 229–253. ISBN 9783527322060.

38.Combarros-Fuertes, P.; Estevinho, L.M.; Dias, L.G.; Castro, J.M.; Tomás-Barberán, F.A.; Tornadijo, M.E.; Fresno-Baro, J.M.Bioactive Components and Antioxidant and Antibacterial Activities of Different Varieties of Honey: A Screening Prior to Clinical Application. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2019, 67, 688–698. [CrossRef]

39.Krishnakumar, G.S.; Mahendiran, B.; Gopalakrishnan, S.; Muthusamy, S.; Malarkodi Elangovan, S. Honey Based Treatment Strategies for Infected Wounds and Burns: A Systematic Review of Recent Pre-Clinical Research. Wound Med. 2020,30,100188[CrossRef]

40.Sukur, S.M.; Halim, A.S.; Singh, K.K.B. Evaluations of Bacterial Contaminated Full Thickness Burn Wound Healing in SpragueDawley Rats Treated with Tualang Honey. Indian J. Plast. Surg. 2011, 44, 112–117. [CrossRef]

41.Natarajan, S.; Williamson, D.; Grey, J.; Harding, K.G.; Cooper, R.A. Healing of an MRSA-Colonized, Hydroxyurea-Induced Leg Ulcer with Honey. J. Dermatol. Treat. 2001, 12, 33–36. [CrossRef]

42.Gethin, G.; Cowman, S. Bacteriological Changes in Sloughy Venous Leg Ulcers Treated with Manuka Honey or Hydrogel: An RCT. J. Wound Care 2008, 17, 241–247. [CrossRef]

43.Johnson, D.W.; Van Eps, C.; Mudge, D.W.; Wiggins, K.J.; Armstrong, K.; Hawley, C.M.; Campbell, S.B.; Isbel, N.M.; Nimmo,G.R.; Gibbs, H. Randomized, Controlled Trial of Topical Exit-Site Application of Honey (Medihoney) versus Mupirocin for the Prevention of Catheter-Associated Infections in Hemodialysis Patients. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 2005, 16, 1456–1462. [CrossRef][PubMed]

44.Sindi, A.; Chawn, M.V.B.; Hernandez, M.E.; Green, K.; Islam, M.K.; Locher, C.; Hammer, K. Anti-Biofifilm Effects and Characterisation of the Hydrogen Peroxide Activity of a Range of Western Australian Honeys Compared to Manuka and Multiflfloral Honeys.Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–7. [CrossRef]

45.Cooper, R.; Jenkins, L.; Rowlands, R. Inhibition of Biofifilms through the Use of Manuka Honey. Wounds 2011, 7, 24–32.

46.Maddocks, S.E.; Lopez, M.S.; Rowlands, R.S.; Cooper, R.A. Manuka Honey Inhibits the Development of Streptococcus Pyogenes Biofifilms and Causes Reduced Expression of Two Fibronectin Binding Proteins. Microbiology 2012, 158, 781–790. [CrossRef][PubMed]

47.Merckoll, P.; Jonassen, T.Ø.; Vad, M.E.; Jeansson, S.L.; Melby, K.K. Bacteria, Biofifilm and Honey: A Study of the Effects of Honey on “planktonic” and Biofifilm-Embedded Chronic Wound Bacteria. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. 2009, 41, 341–347. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

48.Kot, B.; Sytykiewicz, H.; Sprawka, I.; Witeska, M. Effect of Manuka Honey on Biofifilm-Associated Genes Expression during Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Biofifilm Formation. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13552. [CrossRef]

49.Wasfifi, R.; Elkhatib, W.F.; Khairalla, A.S. Effects of Selected Egyptian Honeys on the Cellular Ultrastructure and the Gene Expression Profifile of Escherichia Coli. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0150984. [CrossRef]

50.Truchado, P.; López-Gálvez, F.; Gil, M.I.; Tomás-Barberán, F.A.; Allende, A. Quorum Sensing Inhibitory and Antimicrobial Activities of Honeys and the Relationship with Individual Phenolics. Food Chem. 2009, 115, 1337–1344. [CrossRef]

51.Jenkins, R.; Cooper, R. Improving Antibiotic Activity against Wound Pathogens with Manuka Honey In Vitro. PLoS ONE 2012,7, e45600. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

52.Jenkins, R.E.; Cooper, R. Synergy between Oxacillin and Manuka Honey Sensitizes Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus to Oxacillin. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2012, 67, 1405–1407. [CrossRef]

53.Silva, B.; Biluca, F.C.; Gonzaga, L.V.; Fett, R.; Dalmarco, E.M.; Caon, T.; Costa, A.C.O. In Vitro Anti-Inflflammatory Properties of Honey Flavonoids: A Review. Food Res. Int. 2021, 141, 110086. [CrossRef]

54.Yadav, A.; Verma, S.; Keshri, G.K.; Gupta, A. Combination of Medicinal Honey and 904 nm Superpulsed Laser-Mediated Photobiomodulation Promotes Healing and Impedes Inflflammation, Pain in Full-Thickness Burn. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B Biol. 2018, 186, 152–159. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55.Nooh, H.Z.; Nour-Eldien, N.M. The Dual Anti-Inflflammatory and Antioxidant Activities of Natural Honey Promote Cell Proliferation and Neural Regeneration in a Rat Model of Colitis. Acta Histochem. 2016, 118, 588–595. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

56.Kassim, M.; Achoui, M.; Mansor, M.; Mohd, K. Fitoterapia The Inhibitory Effects of Gelam Honey and Its Extracts on Nitric Oxide and Prostaglandin E 2 in in Fl Ammatory Tissues. Fitoterapia 2010, 81, 1196–1201. [CrossRef]

57.Kassim, M.; Achoui, M.; Mustafa, M.R.; Mohd, M.A.; Yusoff, K.M. Ellagic Acid, Phenolic Acids, and Flavonoids in Malaysian Honey Extracts Demonstrate in Vitro Anti-Inflflammatory Activity. Nutr. Res. 2010, 30, 650–659. [CrossRef]

58.Leong, A.G.; Herst, P.M.; Harper, J.L. Indigenous New Zealand Honeys Exhibit Multiple Anti-Inflflammatory Activities. Innate Immun. 2011, 18, 459–466. [CrossRef]

59.Al-Mamary, M.; Al-Meeri, A.; Al-Habori, M. Antioxidant Activities and Total Phenolics of Different Types of Honey. Nutr. Res. 2002, 22, 1041–1047. [CrossRef]

60.Gheldof, N.; Engeseth, N.J. Antioxidant Capacity of Honeys from Various Floral Sources Based on the Determination of Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity and Inhibition of in Vitro Lipoprotein Oxidation in Human Serum Samples. J. Agric. Food Chem.2002, 50, 3050–3055. [CrossRef]

61.Brudzynski, K.; Miotto, D. The Relationship between the Content of Maillard Reaction-like Products and Bioactivity of Canadian Honeys. Food Chem. 2011, 124, 869–874. [CrossRef]

62.Brudzynski, K.; Miotto, D. The Recognition of High Molecular Weight Melanoidins as the Main Components Responsible for Radical-Scavenging Capacity of Unheated and Heat-Treated Canadian Honeys. Food Chem. 2011, 125, 570–575. [CrossRef]

63.Pyrzynska, K.; Biesaga, M. Analysis of Phenolic Acids and Flavonoids in Honey. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2009, 28, 893–902.[CrossRef]

64.Majtan, J. Honey: An Immunomodulator in Wound Healing. Wound Repair Regen. 2014, 22, 187–192. [CrossRef]

65.Alvarez-suarez, J.M.; Giampieri, F.; Battino, M. Honey as a Source of Dietary Antioxidants: Structures, Bioavailability and Evidence of Protective Effects against Human Chronic Diseases. Curr. Med. Chem. 2013, 20, 621–638. [CrossRef]

66.Subrahmanyam, M. A Prospective Randomised Clinical and Histological Study of Superfificial Burn Wound Healing with Honey and Silver Sulfadiazine. Burns 1998, 24, 157–161. [CrossRef]

67.Kumar, P.; Kumar, S.; Udupa, E.P.; Kumar, U.; Rao, P.; Honnegowda, T. Role of Angiogenesis and Angiogenic Factors in Acute and Chronic Wound Healing. Plast. Aesthetic Res. 2015, 2, 243. [CrossRef]

68.Rossiter, K.; Cooper, A.J.; Voegeli, D.; Lwaleed, B.A. Honey Promotes Angiogeneic Activity in the Rat Aortic Ring Assay. J. Wound Care 2010, 19, 440–446. [CrossRef]

69.Chaudhary, A.; Bag, S.; Banerjee, P.; Chatterjee, J. Wound Healing Effificacy of Jamun Honey in Diabetic Mice Model through Reepithelialization, Collagen Deposition and Angiogenesis. J. Tradit. Complement. Med. 2020, 10, 529–543. [CrossRef]

70.Eteraf-oskouei, T.; Najafifi, M. Traditional and Modern Uses of Natural Honey in Human Diseases: A Review. Iran. J. Basic Med Sci. 2013, 16, 731–742.

71.Stewart, J.A.; McGrane, O.L.; Wedmore, I.S. Wound Care in the Wilderness: Is There Evidence for Honey? Wilderness Environ. Med. 2014, 25, 103–110. [CrossRef]

72.Gethin, G.T.; Cowman, S.; Conroy, R.M. The Impact of Manuka Honey Dressings on the Surface PH of Chronic Wounds. Proc. Int.Wound J. 2008, 5, 185–194. [CrossRef]

73.Eteraf-Oskouei, T.; Najafifi, M.; Gharehbagheri, A. Natural Honey: A New and Potent Anti-Angiogenic Agent in the Air-Pouch Model of Inflflammation. Drug Res. 2013, 64, 530–536. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

74.Barui, A.; Mandal, N.; Majumder, S.; Das, R.K.; Sengupta, S.; Banerjee, P.; Ray, A.K.; Roychaudhuri, C.; Chatterjee, J. Assessment of Molecular Events during in Vitro Re-Epithelialization under Honey-Alginate Matrix Ambience. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2013, 33,3418–3425. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

75.Tonks, A.; Dudley, E.; Porter, N.G.; Parton, J.; Brazier, J.; Smith, E.L.; Tonks, A. A 5.8-kDa Component of Manuka Honey Stimulates Immune Cells via TLR4. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2007, 82, 1147–1155. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

76.Al-Waili, N.S.; Haq, A. Effect of Honey on Antibody Production against Thymus-Dependent and Thymus-Independent Antigens in Primary and Secondary Immune Responses. J. Med. Food 2004, 7, 491–494. [CrossRef]

77.Wink, D.A.; Hines, H.B.; Cheng, R.Y.S.; Switzer, C.H.; Flores-Santana, W.; Vitek, M.P.; Ridnour, L.A.; Colton, C.A. Nitric Oxide and Redox Mechanisms in the Immune Response. J. Leukoc. Biol. 2011, 89, 873–891. [CrossRef]

78.Al-Waili, N.S. Identifification of Nitric Oxide Metabolites in Various Honeys: Effects of Intravenous Honey on Plasma and Urinary Nitric Oxide Metabolites Concentrations. J. Med. Food 2003, 6, 359–364. [CrossRef]

79.Azmi, M.F.; Abd Ghafar, N.; Che Hamzah, J.; Chua, K.H.; Ng, S.L. The Role of Gelam Honey in Accelerating Reepithelialization of Ex Vivo Corneal Abrasion Model. J. Food Biochem. 2021, 45, e13645. [CrossRef]

80.Angioi, R.; Morrin, A.; White, B. The Rediscovery of Honey for Skin Repair: Recent Advances in Mechanisms for Honey-Mediated Wound Healing and Scaffolded Application Techniques. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5192. [CrossRef]

81.Majtan, J.; Kumar, P.; Majtan, T.; Walls, A.F.; Klaudiny, J. Effect of Honey and Its Major Royal Jelly Protein 1 on Cytokine and MMP-9 MRNA Transcripts in Human Keratinocytes. Exp. Dermatol. 2010, 19, e73–e79. [CrossRef]

82.Molan, P.C. Re-Introducing Honey in the Management of Wounds and Ulcers—Theory and Practice. Ostomy/Wound Manag. 2002,48, 28–40.

83.Oluwatosin, O.M.; Olabanji, J.K.; Oluwatosin, O.A.; Tijani, L.A.; Onyechi, H.U. A Comparison of Topical Honey and Phenytoin in the Treatment of Chronic Leg Ulcers. Afr. J. Med. Med Sci. 2000, 29, 31–34. [PubMed]

84.Kwakman, P.H.S.; Zaat, S.A.J. Antibacterial Components of Honey. IUBMB Life 2012, 64, 48–55. [CrossRef]

85.Horniackova, M.; Bucekova, M.; Valachova, I.; Majtan, J. Effect of Gamma Radiation on the Antibacterial and Antibiofifilm Activity of Honeydew Honey. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2017, 243, 81–88. [CrossRef]

86.Molan, P.C.; Allen, K.L. The Effect of Gamma-Irradiation on the Antibacterial Activity of Honey. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1996, 48,1206–1209. [CrossRef]

87.Gunduz, A.; Turedi, S.; Oksuz, H. The Honey, the Poison, the Weapon. Wilderness Environ. Med. 2011, 22, 182–184. [CrossRef]

88.Gunduz, A.; Turedi, S.; Russell, R.M.; Ayaz, F.A. Clinical Review of Grayanotoxin/Mad Honey Poisoning Past and Present. Clin.Toxicol. 2008, 46, 437–442. [CrossRef]

89.Scepankova, H.; Saraiva, J.A.; Estevinho, L.M. Honey health benefifits and uses in medicine. In Bee Products—Chemical and Biological Properties; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 83–96.

90.Hossain, L.; Lim, L.Y.; Hammer, K.; Hettiarachchi, D.; Locher, C. Honey-Based Medicinal Formulations: A Critical Review. Appl.Sci. 2021, 11, 5159. [CrossRef]

91.Bateman, S.; Graham, T. The Use of MedihoneyTM Antibacterial Wound Gel on Surgical Wounds Post-CABG. Wounds 2007, 3,76–83.

92.Rezvani Ghomi, E.; Khalili, S.; Nouri Khorasani, S.; Esmaeely Neisiany, R.; Ramakrishna, S. Wound Dressings: Current Advances and Future Directions. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2019, 136, 1–12. [CrossRef]

93.Rajput, M.; Mandal, M.; Anura, A.; Mukhopadhyay, A.; Subramanian, B.; Paul, R.R.; Chatterjee, J. Honey Loaded Silk Fibroin 3D Porous Scaffold Facilitates Homeostatic Full-Thickness Wound Healing. Materialia 2020, 12, 100703. [CrossRef]

94.Datta, S.; Sarkar, R.; Vyas, V.; Bhutoria, S.; Barui, A.; Roy Chowdhury, A.; Datta, P. Alginate-Honey Bioinks with Improved Cell Responses for Applications as Bioprinted Tissue Engineered Constructs. J. Mater. Res. 2018, 33, 2029–2039. [CrossRef]

95.Schuhladen, K.; Mukoo, P.; Liverani, L.; Nescakova, Z.; Boccaccini, A.R. Manuka Honey and Bioactive Glass Impart Methylcellu lose Foams with Antibacterial Effects for Wound-Healing Applications. Biomed. Mater. 2020, 15, 065002. [CrossRef]

96.Negut, I.; Dorcioman, G.; Grumezescu, V. Scaffolds for Wound Healing Applications. Polymers 2020, 12, 2010. [CrossRef]

97.Öhnstedt, E.; Lofton Tomenius, H.; Vågesjö, E.; Phillipson, M. The Discovery and Development of Topical Medicines for Wound Healing. Expert Opin. Drug Discov. 2019, 14, 485–497. [CrossRef]

98.Minden-Birkenmaier, B.A.; Bowlin, G.L. Honey-Based Templates in Wound Healing and Tissue Engineering. Bioengineering 2018,5, 46. [CrossRef]

99.El-Kased, R.F.; Amer, R.I.; Attia, D.; Elmazar, M.M. Honey-Based Hydrogel: In Vitro and Comparative in Vivo Evaluation for Burn Wound Healing. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 9692. [CrossRef]

100.Mohd Zohdi, R.; Abu Bakar Zakaria, Z.; Yusof, N.; Mohamed Mustapha, N.; Abdullah, M.N.H. Gelam (Melaleuca Spp.) Honey-Based Hydrogel as Burn Wound Dressing. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2012, 2012, 843025. [CrossRef]

101.Noori, S.; Kokabi, M.; Hassan, Z.M. Poly(Vinyl Alcohol)/Chitosan/Honey/Clay Responsive Nanocomposite Hydrogel Wound Dressing. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018, 135, 46311. [CrossRef]

102.Tavakoli, J.; Tang, Y. Honey/PVA Hybrid Wound Dressings with Controlled Release of Antibiotics: Structural, Physico-Mechanical and in-Vitro Biomedical Studies. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2017, 77, 318–325. [CrossRef]

103.Afshari, M.J.; Sheikh, N.; Afarideh, H. PVA/CM-Chitosan/Honey Hydrogels Prepared by Using the Combined Technique of Irradiation Followed by Freeze-Thawing. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2015, 113, 28–35. [CrossRef]

104.Wang, T.; Zhu, X.K.; Xue, X.T.; Wu, D.Y. Hydrogel Sheets of Chitosan, Honey and Gelatin as Burn Wound Dressings. Carbohydr.Polym. 2012, 88, 75–83. [CrossRef]

105.Zhang, Q.; Lin, Z.; Zhang, W.; Huang, T.; Jiang, J.; Ren, Y.; Zhang, R.; Li, W.; Zhang, X.; Tu, Q. Fabrication of Green Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) Nanofifibers Using Natural Deep Eutectic Solvent for Fast-Dissolving Drug Delivery. RSC Adv. 2020, 11, 1012–1021.[CrossRef]

106.Croitoru, A.M.; Ficai, D.; Ficai, A.; Mihailescu, N.; Andronescu, E.; Turculet, C.F. Nanostructured Fibers Containing Natural or Synthetic Bioactive Compounds in Wound Dressing Applications. Materials 2020, 13, 2407. [CrossRef]

107.Abou Zekry, S.S.; Abdellatif, A.; Azzazy, H.M.E. Fabrication of Pomegranate/Honey Nanofifibers for Use as Antibacterial Wound Dressings. Wound Med. 2020, 28, 100181. [CrossRef]

108.Sarkar, R.; Ghosh, A.; Barui, A.; Datta, P. Repositing Honey Incorporated Electrospun Nanofifiber Membranes to Provide AntiOxidant, Anti-Bacterial and Anti-Inflflammatory Microenvironment for Wound Regeneration. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 2018,29, 31. [CrossRef]

109.Sarhan, W.A.; Azzazy, H.M.E. High Concentration Honey Chitosan Electrospun Nanofifibers: Biocompatibility and Antibacterial Effects. Carbohydr. Polym. 2015, 122, 135–143. [CrossRef]

110.Nazeri, S.; Ardakani, E.M.; Babavalian, H.; Latififi, A.M. Evaluation of Effectiveness of Honey-Based Alginate Hydrogel on Wound Healing in Rat Model. J. Appl. Biotechnol. Rep. 2015, 2, 293–297.

111.Shamloo, A.; Aghababaie, Z.; Afjoul, H.; Jami, M.; Bidgoli, M.R.; Vossoughi, M.; Ramazani, A.; Kamyabhesari, K. Fabrication and Evaluation of Chitosan/Gelatin/PVA Hydrogel Incorporating Honey for Wound Healing Applications: An in Vitro, in Vivo Study. Int. J. Pharm. 2021, 592, 120068. [CrossRef]

112.Giusto, G.; Vercelli, C.; Comino, F.; Caramello, V.; Tursi, M.; Gandini, M. A New, Easy-to-Make Pectin-Honey Hydrogel Enhances Wound Healing in Rats. BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 2017, 17, 266. [CrossRef]

113.Sarhan, W.A.; Azzazy, H.M.E.; El-Sherbiny, I.M. The Effect of Increasing Honey Concentration on the Properties of the Honey/Polyvinyl Alcohol/Chitosan Nanofifibers. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2016, 67, 276–284. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

114.Sarhan, W.A.; Azzazy, H.M. Apitherapeutics and Phage-Loaded Nanofifibers as Wound Dressings with Enhanced Wound Healing and Antibacterial Activity. Nanomedicine 2017, 12, 2055–2067. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

115.Amin, M.A.; Abdel-Raheem, I.T. Accelerated wound healing and anti-inflflammatory effects of physically cross linked polyvinyl alcohol-chitosan hydrogel containing honey bee venom in diabetic rats. Arch. Pharm. Res. 2014, 37, 1016–1031. [CrossRef][PubMed]

116.Maleki, H.; Gharehaghaji, A.A.; Dijkstra, P.J. A Novel Honey-Based Nanofifibrous Scaffold for Wound Dressing Application. J.Appl. Polym. Sci. 2013, 127, 4086–4092. [CrossRef]

117.Khan, M.Q.; Lee, H.; Khatri, Z.; Kharaghani, D.; Khatri, M.; Ishikawa, T.; Im, S.S.; Kim, I.S. Fabrication and Characterization of Nanofifibers of Honey/Poly(1,4-Cyclohexane Dimethylene Isosorbide Trephthalate) by Electrospinning. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2017,81, 247–251. [CrossRef]

118.Hixon, K.R.; Lu, T.; Mcbride-gagyi, S.H.; Janowiak, B.E.; Sell, S.A. A Comparison of Tissue Engineering Scaffolds Incorporated with Manuka Honey of Varying UMF. BioMed Res. Int. 2017, 2017, 4843065. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

119.Yang, X.; Fan, L.; Ma, L.; Wang, Y.; Lin, S.; Yu, F.; Pan, X.; Luo, G.; Zhang, D.; Wang, H. Green Electrospun Manuka Honey/Silk Fibroin Fibrous Matrices as Potential Wound Dressing. Mater. Des. 2017, 119, 76–84. [CrossRef]

120.Minden-Birkenmaier, B.A.; Neuhalfen, R.M.; Janowiak, B.E.; Sell, S.A. Preliminary Investigation and Characterization of Electrospun Polycaprolactone and Manuka Honey Scaffolds for Dermal Repair. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2015, 10, 155892501501000.[CrossRef]

This article belongs to the Special Issue Bioproducts for Health II