Abstract:Despite the advances in the regeneration/rehabilitation field of damaged tissues, the functional recovery of peripheral nerves (PNs), especially in a long gap injury, is considered a great medical challenge. Recent progress in nanomedicine has provided great hope for PN regeneration through the strategy of controlling cell behavior by metal nanoparticles individually or loaded on scaffolds/conduits. Despite the confirmed toxicity of metal nanoparticles due to long-term accumulation in nontarget tissues, they p… Show more
“…To this purpose, gold (Au), silver (Ag), and copper (Cu) can be used. Whether combined with hydrogels in scaffold materials, they are responsible for conduit topography modification, mechanical strength improvement, enhancement in neurotrophic factor secretion, and amelioration in the ion flow, as well as in the electrical signals' regulation [86]. Among metal nanoparticles, Au nanoparticles are the most stable, also showing unique electrical, optical, and magnetic properties that make nerve conduits enriched with them a sort of therapeutic device [87].…”
In peripheral nerve injuries (PNI) with substance loss, where tensionless end-to-end suture is not achievable, the positioning of a graft is required. Available options include autografts (e.g., sural nerve, medial and lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerves, superficial branch of the radial nerve), allografts (Avance®; human origin), and hollow nerve conduits. There are eleven commercial hollow conduits approved for clinical, and they consist of devices made of a non-biodegradable synthetic polymer (polyvinyl alcohol), biodegradable synthetic polymers (poly(DL-lactide-ε-caprolactone); polyglycolic acid), and biodegradable natural polymers (collagen type I with/without glycosaminoglycan; chitosan; porcine small intestinal submucosa); different resorption times are available for resorbable guides, ranging from three months to four years. Unfortunately, anatomical/functional nerve regeneration requirements are not satisfied by any of the possible alternatives; to date, focusing on wall and/or inner lumen organization/functionalization seems to be the most promising strategy for next-generation device fabrication. Porous or grooved walls as well as multichannel lumens and luminal fillers are the most intriguing options, eventually also including the addition of cells (Schwann cells, bone marrow-derived, and adipose tissue derived stem cells) to support nerve regeneration. This review aims to describe common alternatives for severe PNI recovery with a highlight of future conduits.
“…To this purpose, gold (Au), silver (Ag), and copper (Cu) can be used. Whether combined with hydrogels in scaffold materials, they are responsible for conduit topography modification, mechanical strength improvement, enhancement in neurotrophic factor secretion, and amelioration in the ion flow, as well as in the electrical signals' regulation [86]. Among metal nanoparticles, Au nanoparticles are the most stable, also showing unique electrical, optical, and magnetic properties that make nerve conduits enriched with them a sort of therapeutic device [87].…”
In peripheral nerve injuries (PNI) with substance loss, where tensionless end-to-end suture is not achievable, the positioning of a graft is required. Available options include autografts (e.g., sural nerve, medial and lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerves, superficial branch of the radial nerve), allografts (Avance®; human origin), and hollow nerve conduits. There are eleven commercial hollow conduits approved for clinical, and they consist of devices made of a non-biodegradable synthetic polymer (polyvinyl alcohol), biodegradable synthetic polymers (poly(DL-lactide-ε-caprolactone); polyglycolic acid), and biodegradable natural polymers (collagen type I with/without glycosaminoglycan; chitosan; porcine small intestinal submucosa); different resorption times are available for resorbable guides, ranging from three months to four years. Unfortunately, anatomical/functional nerve regeneration requirements are not satisfied by any of the possible alternatives; to date, focusing on wall and/or inner lumen organization/functionalization seems to be the most promising strategy for next-generation device fabrication. Porous or grooved walls as well as multichannel lumens and luminal fillers are the most intriguing options, eventually also including the addition of cells (Schwann cells, bone marrow-derived, and adipose tissue derived stem cells) to support nerve regeneration. This review aims to describe common alternatives for severe PNI recovery with a highlight of future conduits.
“… 6 Notably, nanoparticles, enriched with distinct attributes stemming from their complicated nanoscale structure, have emerged as noteworthy candidates for potential therapy, offering the capacity to intricately enhance the multifaceted process of peripheral nerve repair ( Figure 1 ). 7 , 8 Nanoparticles, often crafted from a composite of diverse materials engineered at the nanometer scale, harness their exceptional versatility to potentially address the challenges associated with peripheral nerve restoration. 9 Their diminutive dimensions grant nanoparticles a unique capability to interface with biological structures at a scale that aligns harmoniously with the complexities of the cellular milieu.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the remarkable adjustability inherent in nanoparticles’ physicochemical properties has unlocked potentials for customizing their behavior, including their interactions with nerve cells, growth factors, and the neighboring biomaterial milieu. 7 , 10 Nevertheless, further comprehensive investigations are imperative to unveil the mechanistic underpinnings that substantiate the advantageous contributions of nanoparticle-enabled therapy in nerve regeneration. Figure 1 The outline of the nanoparticle-enabled therapies in promotion of peripheral nerve regeneration.…”
Peripheral nerve injuries, arising from a diverse range of etiologies such as trauma and underlying medical conditions, pose substantial challenges in both clinical management and subsequent restoration of functional capacity. Addressing these challenges, nanoparticles have emerged as a promising therapeutic modality poised to augment the process of peripheral nerve regeneration. However, a comprehensive elucidation of the complicated mechanistic foundations responsible for the favorable effects of nanoparticle-based therapy on nerve regeneration remains imperative. This review aims to scrutinize the potential of nanoparticles as innovative therapeutic carriers for promoting peripheral nerve repair. This review encompasses an in-depth exploration of the classifications and synthesis methodologies associated with nanoparticles. Additionally, we discuss and summarize the multifaceted roles that nanoparticles play, including neuroprotection, facilitation of axonal growth, and efficient drug delivery mechanisms. Furthermore, we present essential considerations and highlight the potential synergies of integrating nanoparticles with emerging technologies. Through this comprehensive review, we highlight the indispensable role of nanoparticles in propelling advancements in peripheral nerve regeneration.
“…This can be achieved using embryonic or fetal cells, but ethical concerns and a high likelihood of tissue rejection are associated with this approach. On the other hand, using adult cells like neural stem cells allows for autologous grafts with fewer ethical issues ( Sivandzade and Cucullo, 2021 ; Sharifi et al, 2022 ).…”
In tissue engineering, the decellularization of organs and tissues as a biological scaffold plays a critical role in the repair of neurodegenerative diseases. Various protocols for cell removal can distinguish the effects of treatment ability, tissue structure, and extracellular matrix (ECM) ability. Despite considerable progress in nerve regeneration and functional recovery, the slow regeneration and recovery potential of the central nervous system (CNS) remains a challenge. The success of neural tissue engineering is primarily influenced by composition, microstructure, and mechanical properties. The primary objective of restorative techniques is to guide existing axons properly toward the distal end of the damaged nerve and the target organs. However, due to the limitations of nerve autografts, researchers are seeking alternative methods with high therapeutic efficiency and without the limitations of autograft transplantation. Decellularization scaffolds, due to their lack of immunogenicity and the preservation of essential factors in the ECM and high angiogenic ability, provide a suitable three-dimensional (3D) substrate for the adhesion and growth of axons being repaired toward the target organs. This study focuses on mentioning the types of scaffolds used in nerve regeneration, and the methods of tissue decellularization, and specifically explores the use of decellularized nerve tissues (DNT) for nerve transplantation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
