Introduction: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) impairs wound healing due to persistent hyperglycemia, promoting chronic inflammation and increasing infection risk. Biochemical markers such as blood glucose and HbA1c confirm the diabetic state, while hematological analyses reflect systemic immune modulation in response to therapies. Methodology: Male Balb/c mice with streptozotocin-induced diabetes were confirmed diabetic by fasting blood glucose (≥200 mg/dL) and HbA1c ≥ 6.0%. Full-thickness wounds were created, infected with Staphylococcus aureus, and treated for 14 days with: G1—saline, G2—antibacterial ointment, G3—blue LED, G4—NLB + LED, G5—NLB with nanoemulsions (CuraTex), G6—CuraTex + LED, and G7—Nanoemulgel + LED. Treatments were applied every 48 h, with 5 min phototherapy sessions. Blood samples were analyzed for glucose, HbA1c, hemoglobin, hematocrit, blood cells, platelets, and leukocyte differential. All procedures were conducted in accordance with ethical standards and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa) under protocol nº 23106.029983/2024-69. Results: Control groups showed hyperglycemia, anemia, and neutrophilic leukocytosis. LED reduced inflammation and normalized leukocyte counts. NLB improved neutrophil–lymphocyte balance, and NLB + LED promoted hematological stability. CuraTex + LED and Nanoemulgel achieved the best results, enhancing lymphocyte recovery and immune modulation. Conclusions: The combination of CuraTex and LED phototherapy modulated inflammation and improved immune balance in diabetic mice, highlighting its potential as an innovative and ethically validated therapy for chronic wounds.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, G.J.B.C. and M.L.B.C.; methodology, G.J.B.C., G.O.S., P.H.O., L.S.A. and M.C.R.; validation, G.J.B.C. and M.L.B.C.; formal analysis, G.J.B.C. and M.L.B.C.; investigation, G.J.B.C., G.O.S., P.H.O., G.A.J., L.S.A. and M.C.R.; resources, M.L.B.C.; data curation, G.J.B.C.; writing—original draft preparation, G.J.B.C.; writing—review and editing, M.L.B.C.; visualization, G.J.B.C.; supervision, M.L.B.C.; project administration, G.J.B.C. and G.A.J.; funding acquisition, M.L.B.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by the Research Support Foundation of the Federal District (FAPDF), process n° 00193.00002360/2022-11, and by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), Finance Code 001.
Institutional Review Board Statement
The animal study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee on Animal Use (CEUA) of University of Brasília, under protocol number 23106.029983/2024-69, in accordance with national legislation and international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable. This study did not involve human participants.
Data Availability Statement
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to institutional restrictions.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.