Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewPubMedOpen access

Where Do We Stand for Nerve Regeneration and Functional Recovery After Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation?

Mathieu O., Knoedler L., Schaschinger T., Fenske J., Klimitz FJ., Jeljeli M.

Narrative Review on Face & Skin, published in Microsurgery (2026) — 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
Microsurgery (2026)
Country
United States
Reported sample size
—
Source database
PubMed
PMID
41665096
PMCID
PMC12888073
DOI
10.1002/micr.70192
Citations
1

Abstract (original English)

Introduction Vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA) offers a reconstructive solution for patients with severe limb and facial defects by transplanting multiple tissue types-including skin, muscle, bone, and nerves-as a single unit. This review examines current challenges in nerve regeneration and functional recovery following VCA, and assesses emerging strategies aimed at overcoming these hurdles. Methods A comprehensive literature review was conducted, focusing on clinical outcomes from upper limb and facial transplantation programs worldwide. Studies evaluating rehabilitation protocols, transplantation levels, follow-up durations, and experimental strategies (cellular therapies, biomaterials, and neurotrophic factor delivery) were analyzed to determine their impact on nerve regeneration and functional recovery. Results Clinical evidence indicates that while protective sensation can return within months after VCA, motor function recovery often extends over several years. Variability in outcomes has been noted, largely due to differences in rehabilitation practices, assessment metrics, and follow-up duration. Experimental approaches, including stem cell-based therapies-especially those using adipose-derived stem cells-demonstrate potential for enhancing axonal regeneration and modulating immune responses, although the long-term benefits and standardized measures remai

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
HumansNerve RegenerationRecovery of FunctionVascularized Composite AllotransplantationTreatment Outcome

Browse all related research

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

Related research