Calendula and Wounds: What the Clinical Studies Actually Show

The clinical studies of calendula on wounds are real but small, mixed, and almost all done with extracts, ointments or sprays used under clinical supervision, not with an infused oil like ours. We make a cosmetic oil, make no medical claims for it, and would not tell anyone to put it on an open wound or a surgical incision. What follows is what the trials found, which ones to treat with caution, and where the honest answer is "ask your care team."

Calendula oil bottle

Calendula Oil

Our own small-batch calendula oil, in sizes from 0.5 oz to bulk.

From $13.99

Shop Calendula Oil →

Decide first: is this a wound for a clinician?

The EU herbal committee's monograph lists calendula flower only for "minor" wounds and minor skin inflammation, on the basis of long-standing use rather than trials, and says to consult a doctor or qualified practitioner if symptoms last longer than one week (EMA/HMPC, 2018). Most of the trials below involved leg ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, surgical wounds or radiotherapy skin, which are situations with a clinician already in charge. If your wound is deep, infected-looking, slow to close, on a diabetic foot or leg ulcer, or follows surgery, the product choice belongs to that clinician, not to a product page.

What the reviews concluded

A 2008 systematic review (Leach, Wounds) found six randomised trials of topical calendula for wounds, only one of good quality, and called the supporting evidence weak. A 2019 review (Givol et al., Wound Repair Regen) covered 14 studies, seven in animals and seven in people. In acute wounds, faster resolution of inflammation and more granulation tissue appeared consistently in five animal studies and one randomised trial. In venous ulcers, two controlled studies reported smaller ulcer area; one randomised trial in diabetic leg ulcers showed no improvement; burn results were mixed, with a trial in partial to full-thickness burns showing no benefit. The EU committee's own 2018 assessment judged most studies small with methodological weakness, and the evidence insufficient for a "well-established use" indication (EMA/HMPC, 2018). A 2025 periodic review of newer literature did not change that position.

The individual trials, by wound type

SettingStudyWhat was reportedWhy to be careful
Acute hand woundsGiostri et al., Tissue Barriers, 2022: 40 patientsStandardized calendula extract epithelialised in a mean 8.6 days versus 13.2 days with mineral oil (p < 0.05 as printed)Proprietary extract; comparator was mineral oil; small; a co-author also wrote the manufacturer-linked ulcer papers below
Venous leg ulcersDuran et al., Int J Tissue React, 2005: 34 patientsUlcer area fell 41.7% with a marigold-extract ointment versus 14.5% with saline dressings over 3 weeks (p < 0.05); authors called results preliminarySaline control, no placebo ointment; the EU assessment calls it an observational study
Venous leg ulcersBuzzi et al., J Wound Care, 2016: 57 patientsComplete epithelialisation 72% with an extract spray versus 32% with standard care over up to 30 weeksNot randomised per the EU assessment; authors affiliated with the extract's maker (a no-conflict declaration is printed)
Diabetic foot ulcersBuzzi et al., Ostomy Wound Manage, 2016: 41 completers78% closed by week 30 with the same extract spray plus offloadingNo control group; 43 of 84 enrolled withdrew; offloading itself confounds
After episiotomyDe Angelis et al., J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med, 2022: 100 womenCalendula ointment group reported lower pain from day two than standard careCompared with standard care, not a placebo; the abstract gives no values
After cesareanJahdi et al., J Family Med Prim Care, 2018: 72 womenOintment compared with routine care using the REEDA scaleThe abstract reports no scores
Earlobe repair scarsKunjir et al., Indian J Otolaryngol, 2025: 35 patients10% calendula ointment versus petroleum jelly, scored differently on day 15 (p < 0.001), not on days 1 or 7Day 15 is too early to judge a scar; direction of difference not in the abstract

Two further points sit under that table. The three trials with the strongest-sounding numbers (Giostri, Duran, Buzzi) used defined extracts, and for the manufacturer-linked extract the authors had a commercial tie. And none of the seven studies tested an infused oil. We would not read "calendula speeds closure" from any of them, only "this specific preparation, in this setting, with this comparator, was followed by this result."

Radiotherapy skin: where trials point in opposite directions

If you are having radiotherapy, this one is for your radiation oncology team. A 2004 French trial (Pommier et al., J Clin Oncol) of 254 women found grade 2 or higher skin reactions in 41% using a calendula ointment and 63% using trolamine (P<.001), though trolamine is not a placebo. Later trials did not repeat it: a blinded Swedish trial of 411 women found 23% versus 19% against a standard cream (Sharp et al., Eur J Oncol Nurs, 2013), and an Australian trial of 81 analysed women found 53% versus 62% against a moisturiser, not significant and underpowered (Siddiquee et al., Australas J Dermatol, 2021). The Oncology Nursing Society's 2020 guideline suggests against calendula for radiodermatitis (Gosselin et al.), and MASCC's 2013 guideline recommended against it for insufficient evidence (Wong et al.). The preparations, comparators and doses differed, which is probably why the results disagree.

What the lab work does and does not support

Cell and animal studies are often cited as the reason calendula "works." In one, a water-soluble fraction of a hydroethanol extract stimulated fibroblast growth and migration in cells and speeded wound closure in mice, with rutin and quercetin-3-O-glucoside as the main compounds in the active fraction (Dinda et al., Phytother Res, 2016). Another gave mice a 5% aqueous extract (Ozturan and Akin, 2025). Reasoning from those papers, the active material was water-soluble, and an oil infusion is not a water extract, so these studies do not support extrapolating to an infused oil. Faradiol esters, which are oil-compatible, show anti-swelling activity in mouse-ear tests as isolated compounds (Zitterl-Eglseer et al., 1997), but nothing we read measures how much transfers into an infused oil.

The few studies with "oil" in the description tell us little. A 2001 Italian study (Lavagna et al.) examined a St John's wort and Calendula arvensis oily extract on cesarean wounds, but that is a different calendula species in a combination and the abstract reports no results. A 2016 diabetic-foot trial (Carvalho et al.) paired laser with calendula oil, and significant area reductions in the abstract are for laser groups, with no separate result for the oil.

Who should skip calendula

The EU monograph lists hypersensitivity to daisy-family (Asteraceae) plants as a contraindication and notes that skin sensitization has been reported, frequency unknown. In one Austrian patch-test series of 443 dermatitis patients, about 2% reacted to marigold (Reider et al., Contact Dermatitis, 2001); those were clinic patients, so it is not a population rate. These trials were not designed to measure reaction risk on broken skin, which is one more reason we keep our oil off wounds. The EU committee also recommends against use in children under 6 and during pregnancy and breastfeeding because adequate data are lacking. That reflects missing data, not documented harm, and a pediatrician or midwife is the right person to ask.

If you want to try our oil on intact skin, read how to patch test first. For scar questions after surgery see the post-surgery scar article, and for pregnancy see calendula oil in pregnancy.

Calendula oil bottle

Calendula Oil

Nature's Golden Botanical, bottled: small-batch calendula oil in sizes from 0.5 oz to bulk.

From $13.99

Shop Calendula Oil →

Sources & Further Reading