Peripheral Nerve Regeneration Reimagined: Cutting-Edge Biomaterials and Biotechnological Innovations
Lam TC., Wu Z., Lee SJ., Leung YY.
Narrative Review, published in Bioengineering (Basel) (2025) — 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
- Bioengineering (Basel) (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40868377
- PMCID
- PMC12383415
- DOI
- 10.3390/bioengineering12080864
- Citations
- 3
Abstract (original English)
Peripheral nerve injuries are frequent clinical issues that can lead to significant functional impairments, greatly impacting patients' quality of life. Developing effective nerve regeneration methods is crucial for restoring function and ensuring the best possible outcomes. This review explores recent advances in nerve regeneration, including nerve guidance conduits (NGCs), which are vital in bridging nerve gaps caused by injury and supporting repair. The field has seen significant progress in biomaterials and biotech, with biodegradable options like collagen and chitosan as well as non-biodegradable materials such as nylon. Innovations like 3D printing have allowed for more intricate conduit designs that more closely mimic natural nerves. Despite these progressions, research continues to focus on improving NGCs-often by adding cells or bioactive substances-to boost nerve regeneration and functional recovery. By analyzing current trends, this review aims to motivate clinicians and researchers to develop more comprehensive nerve repair strategies. It emphasizes approaches that combine scientific innovation with clinical practicality, fostering a more holistic and realistic outlook on enhancing patient outcomes in peripheral 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 evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.