Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Advances in nerve guidance conduits for peripheral nerve repair and regeneration

Zheng S., Wei H., Cheng H., Qi Y., Gu Y., Ma X.

Narrative Review, published in Am J Stem Cells (2023) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

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
Read the A–D evidence level guide

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
Am J Stem Cells (2023)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
38213640
PMCID
PMC10776341
Citations
18

Abstract (original English)

Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) can cause partial or total motor and sensory nerve function, leading to physical disability and nerve pain that severely affects patients' quality of life. Autologous nerve transplantation is currently the clinically recognized gold standard, but due to its inherent limitations, researchers have been searching for alternative treatments. Nerve guidance conduits (NGCs) have attracted much attention as a favorable alternative to promote the repair and regeneration of damaged peripheral nerves. In this review, we provide an overview of the anatomy of peripheral nerves, peripheral nerve injury and repair, and current treatment methods. Importantly, different design strategies of NGCs used for the treatment of PNI and their applications in PNI repair are highlighted. Finally, an outlook on the future development and challenges of NGCs is presented.

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 evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.