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

Physical modulation and peripheral nerve regeneration: a literature review

Zhai X., Wang Y.

Narrative Review, published in Cell Regen (2024) — 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
Cell Regen (2024)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39710804
PMCID
PMC11663830
DOI
10.1186/s13619-024-00215-9
Citations
6

Abstract (original English)

Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) usually causes severe motor, sensory and autonomic dysfunction. In addition to direct surgical repair, rehabilitation exercises, and traditional physical stimuli, for example, electrical stimulation, have been applied in promoting the clinical recovery of PNI for a long time but showed low efficiency. Recently, significant progress has been made in new physical modulation to promote peripheral nerve regeneration. We hereby review current progress on the mechanism of peripheral nerve regeneration after injury and summarize the new findings and evidence for the application of physical modulation, including electrical stimulation, light, ultrasound, magnetic stimulation, and mechanical stretching in experimental studies and the clinical treatment of patients with PNI.

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.