Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Approaches to Peripheral Nerve Repair: Generations of Biomaterial Conduits Yielding to Replacing Autologous Nerve Grafts in Craniomaxillofacial Surgery

Gaudin R., Knipfer C., Henningsen A., Smeets R., Heiland M., Hadlock T.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in Biomed Res Int (2016) — 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
Biomed Res Int (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
27556032
PMCID
PMC4983313
DOI
10.1155/2016/3856262
Citations
110

Abstract (original English)

Peripheral nerve injury is a common clinical entity, which may arise due to traumatic, tumorous, or even iatrogenic injury in craniomaxillofacial surgery. Despite advances in biomaterials and techniques over the past several decades, reconstruction of nerve gaps remains a challenge. Autografts are the gold standard for nerve reconstruction. Using autografts, there is donor site morbidity, subsequent sensory deficit, and potential for neuroma development and infection. Moreover, the need for a second surgical site and limited availability of donor nerves remain a challenge. Thus, increasing efforts have been directed to develop artificial nerve guidance conduits (ANCs) as new methods to replace autografts in the future. Various synthetic conduit materials have been tested in vitro and in vivo, and several first- and second-generation conduits are FDA approved and available for purchase, while third-generation conduits still remain in experimental stages. This paper reviews the current treatment options, summarizes the published literature, and assesses future prospects for the repair of peripheral nerve injury in craniomaxillofacial surgery with a particular focus on facial nerve regeneration.

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
Facial BonesPeripheral NervesAnimalsHumansFacial Nerve InjuriesBiocompatible MaterialsTreatment OutcomeGuided Tissue RegenerationTissue EngineeringEvidence-Based Medicine

Browse all related research

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

Related research