Elucidating the mechanism of corneal epithelial cell repair: unraveling the impact of growth factors
Gong J., Ding G., Hao Z., Li Y., Deng A., Zhang C.
Narrative Review, published in Front Med (Lausanne) (2024) — 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 Med (Lausanne) (2024)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 38638937
- PMCID
- PMC11024251
- DOI
- 10.3389/fmed.2024.1384500
- Citations
- 9
Abstract (original English)
The repair mechanism for corneal epithelial cell injuries encompasses migration, proliferation, and differentiation of corneal epithelial cells, and extracellular matrix remodeling of the stromal structural integrity. Furthermore, it involves the consequential impact of corneal limbal stem cells (LSCs). In recent years, as our comprehension of the mediating mechanisms underlying corneal epithelial injury repair has advanced, it has become increasingly apparent that growth factors play a pivotal role in this intricate process. These growth factors actively contribute to the restoration of corneal epithelial injuries by orchestrating responses and facilitating specific interactions at targeted sites. This article systematically summarizes the role of growth factors in corneal epithelial cell injury repair by searching relevant literature in recent years, and explores the limitations of current literature search, providing a certain scientific basis for subsequent basic research and clinical applications.
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.