Additive Manufacturing of Nerve Guidance Conduits for Regeneration of Injured Peripheral Nerves
Song S., Wang X., Wang T., Yu Q., Hou Z., Zhu Z.
Narrative Review, published in Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Front Bioeng Biotechnol (2020)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 33102468
- PMCID
- PMC7546374
- DOI
- 10.3389/fbioe.2020.590596
- Citations
- 26
Abstract (original English)
As a common and frequent clinical disease, peripheral nerve defect has caused a serious social burden, which is characterized by poor curative effect, long course of treatment and high cost. Nerve autografting is first-line treatment of peripheral nerve injuries (PNIs) but can result in loss of function of the donor site, neuroma formation, and prolonged operative time. Nerve guidance conduit (NGC) serves as the most promising alternative to autologous transplantation, but its production process is complicated and it is difficult to effectively combine growth factors and bioactive substances. In recent years, additive manufacturing of NGCs has effectively solved the above problems due to its simple and efficient manufacturing method, and it can be used as the carrier of bioactive substances. This review examines recent advances in additive manufacture of NGCs for PNIs as well as insight into how these approaches could be improved in future studies.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.