← Back to 整形外科与创面修复

Glucose/ROS-responsive hydrogel targets oxidative stress and cGAS-STING inflammation in diabetic wound repair

A burns and plastic surgery-linked team reports a diabetic wound dressing that responds to glucose and ROS while suppressing macrophage cGAS-STING inflammation.

diabetic woundhydrogelcGAS-STINGoxidative stress

Full Citation

Wang X, Liu Y, Nie T, Tang Z, Tao J, Wang Q, et al. Glucose/ROS-responsive and redox-gated adaptive hydrogel dressing for accelerating diabetic wound repair via synergistic cGAS/STING pathway inhibition and oxidative stress alleviation. Bioact Mater. 2026;62:363-378.

Study typeOpen-access translational biomaterials study combining responsive hydrogel engineering, diabetic wound modeling, oxidative-stress biology, and inflammatory pathway analysis.
IdentifierPMID 41884517 · PMC13011234
DOI10.1016/j.bioactmat.2026.03.025

Background and Question

Diabetic wounds are held in a prolonged inflammatory phase by hyperglycemia, mitochondrial injury, excess reactive oxygen species, impaired vascularization, and bacterial risk. A useful dressing for this setting needs to do more than cover the wound: it should sense the diabetic wound microenvironment, buffer oxidative injury, and reduce inflammatory signaling that blocks transition into proliferation and remodeling.

Research question

Can a glucose/ROS-responsive adaptive hydrogel accelerate diabetic wound repair by combining oxidative-stress relief with inhibition of mtDNA-triggered cGAS-STING macrophage inflammation?

Methods and Evidence Chain

Material strategy

Designed a redox-gated hydrogel dressing with responsiveness to diabetic-wound triggers including glucose and ROS.

Mechanistic target

Focused on hyperglycemia-induced mitochondrial oxidative stress, mtDNA leakage, macrophage STING activation, and sustained cytokine release.

Biological assays

Tested antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and wound-repair effects in diabetic wound models with pathway-oriented readouts.

Evidence chain

Connected wound chemistry to mitochondrial stress control, innate immune signaling, tissue inflammation, and repair progression.

1

Material strategy

Designed a redox-gated hydrogel dressing with responsiveness to diabetic-wound triggers including glucose and ROS.

2

Mechanistic target

Focused on hyperglycemia-induced mitochondrial oxidative stress, mtDNA leakage, macrophage STING activation, and sustained cytokine release.

3

Biological assays

Tested antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and wound-repair effects in diabetic wound models with pathway-oriented readouts.

4

Evidence chain

Connected wound chemistry to mitochondrial stress control, innate immune signaling, tissue inflammation, and repair progression.

Key Results

Pathway fit

The abstract positions mtDNA leakage and STING signaling as a central inflammatory brake in diabetic wounds.

Responsive delivery

The hydrogel design links drug/material behavior to high-glucose and high-ROS wound conditions rather than constant passive release.

Repair direction

The reported effect is acceleration of diabetic wound repair through combined oxidative-stress alleviation and cGAS-STING inhibition.

Clinical relevance

The affiliations include burns and plastic surgery services, strengthening alignment with reconstructive wound-care problems.

Mechanism Interpretation

The proposed mechanism is a wound-microenvironment feedback loop. Hyperglycemia and ROS damage mitochondria, mitochondrial DNA leaks into the cytosol, cGAS-STING signaling activates macrophage inflammatory cytokines, and persistent inflammation blocks repair. A glucose/ROS-responsive hydrogel can interrupt this loop by releasing or activating therapy preferentially in stressed wounds, reducing oxidative injury and lowering STING-driven inflammatory pressure.

Mechanism / workflow schematic

Mermaid source is included so the website can render the diagram in supported browsers.

flowchart TD
  A[Diabetic wound: glucose and ROS] --> B[Mitochondrial oxidative stress]
  B --> C[mtDNA leakage]
  C --> D[cGAS-STING activation in macrophages]
  D --> E[Persistent inflammatory cytokines]
  E --> F[Stalled repair phase]
  G[Glucose/ROS-responsive hydrogel] --> H[Redox-gated local action]
  H --> I[Oxidative stress alleviation]
  H --> J[cGAS-STING pathway inhibition]
  I --> K[Improved granulation and closure]
  J --> K

Clinical and Translational Relevance

Clinical relevance

For reconstructive surgery, diabetic foot wounds, burn wounds with metabolic comorbidity, and delayed donor-site healing often fail because inflammation and oxidative injury are not locally controlled. This paper is relevant because it targets a biologically specific inflammatory axis rather than treating chronic wounds as a generic dressing problem.

Translational value

The translational attraction is the coupling of trigger-responsive material behavior with a testable innate-immune mechanism. That creates measurable biomarkers for future studies: wound ROS, macrophage STING activation, inflammatory cytokines, vascular density, re-epithelialization, and collagen organization.

Limitations and Critique

Clinical gap

The evidence is preclinical and does not yet establish human healing, infection, pain, or recurrence outcomes.

Complex product

Responsive hydrogels can face manufacturing, sterilization, storage, degradation, and regulatory challenges.

Mechanism specificity

cGAS-STING inhibition may not be the dominant bottleneck in every diabetic wound subtype.

Safety window

Long-term immune modulation must be checked because wound defense against pathogens still matters.

Reviewer-style critique

The paper is strong because it frames diabetic wound repair as a coupled metabolic, mitochondrial, and innate-immune problem. The main risk is overgeneralization: a clean mechanistic hydrogel effect in experimental wounds may not survive ischemia, biofilm, neuropathy, pressure, offloading failure, and mixed patient comorbidities.

Practical Next Research Actions

Action 1

Compare the hydrogel with silver dressings, negative-pressure therapy adjuncts, and advanced biologic matrices in diabetic and ischemic wound models.

Action 2

Add blinded histology for epithelial gap, granulation thickness, vascular density, collagen alignment, and macrophage phenotype.

Action 3

Test whether STING pathway biomarkers predict which wounds respond to the dressing.

Action 4

Design a first clinical study around wound-area reduction, time to closure, infection, pain, dressing-change burden, and scar quality.

Evidence-quality judgment

Moderate translational evidence: mechanistically coherent and open access, but not yet practice-changing clinical evidence.