Neuromodulators can promote nerve regeneration and accelerate functional recovery after peripheral nerve injury: A systematic review

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Peripheral nerve injuries (PNIs) are debilitating injuries that are also challenging to treat. With several different techniques being investigated to optimize nerve regeneration, we performed this systematic review aiming to evaluate and synthesize the available peer-reviewed literature regarding PNIs and the research that has been done to optimize peripheral nerve regeneration. Two research databases were searched, and abstracts were reviewed for relevance. The abstracts that met screening criteria then underwent full-text review. Out of 6,128 unique citations, 164 publications were ultimately included in this review. Evidence supports many potential options for the management of PNIs, including surgical treatment and systemic and local administration of various pharmacological agents. Some of the reported benefits of treatment with such agents include faster nerve regeneration, improved functional recovery, neuroma prevention, and decreased scar formation. However, much of the research reviewed has been performed in animal models, not human trails. Additionally, the safety profile of some agents makes systemic treatment difficult. Further translational and clinical studies are needed to fill these remaining gaps in knowledge to make evidence-based recommendations regarding the most effective treatment for PNIs.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

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