Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27278739›Full record

ArticleCritical reviews in biomedical engineering2015

Peripheral Nerve Regeneration Strategies: Electrically Stimulating Polymer Based Nerve Growth Conduits.

Matthew Anderson, Namdev B Shelke, Ohan S Manoukian, Xiaojun Yu, Louise D McCullough, Sangamesh G Kumbar

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical reviews in biomedical engineering, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew AndersonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Institute for Regenerative Engineering, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Raymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, UConn Health, Farmington, CT.
Namdev B ShelkeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Institute for Regenerative Engineering, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Raymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, UConn Health, Farmington, CT.
Ohan S ManoukianDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
Xiaojun YuDepartment of Chemistry, Chemical Biology and Biomedical Engineering, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ.
Louise D McCulloughDepartment of Neuroscience, UConn Health, Farmington, CT.
Sangamesh G KumbarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Institute for Regenerative Engineering, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Raymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical, Biological, Physical and Engineering Sciences, UConn Health, Farmington, CT; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
UConn Health · USStevens Institute of Technology · USUniversity of Connecticut · US

Funding

Nanofiber based artificial nerve graft for peripheral nerve regenerationR03NS058595 · NINDS · THE TRUSTEES OF THE STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI YU, XIAOJUN · 2009 to 2010
$157k
NINDS NIH HHS R03 NS058595
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment of large peripheral nerve damages ranges from the use of an autologous nerve graft to a synthetic nerve growth conduit. Biological grafts, in spite of many merits, show several limitations in terms of availability and donor site morbidity, and outcomes are suboptimal due to fascicle mismatch, scarring, and fibrosis. Tissue engineered nerve graft substitutes utilize polymeric conduits in conjunction with cues both chemical and physical, cells alone and or in combination. The chemical and physical cues delivered through polymeric conduits play an important role and drive tissue regeneration. Electrical stimulation (ES) has been applied toward the repair and regeneration of various tissues such as muscle, tendon, nerve, and articular tissue both in laboratory and clinical settings. The underlying mechanisms that regulate cellular activities such as cell adhesion, proliferation, cell migration, protein production, and tissue regeneration following ES is not fully understood. Polymeric constructs that can carry the electrical stimulation along the length of the scaffold have been developed and characterized for possible nerve regeneration applications. We discuss the use of electrically conductive polymers and associated cell interaction, biocompatibility, tissue regeneration, and recent basic research for nerve regeneration. In conclusion, a multifunctional combinatorial device comprised of biomaterial, structural, functional, cellular, and molecular aspects may be the best way forward for effective peripheral nerve regeneration.

Indexed as

Nerve RegenerationTissue EngineeringBiocompatible MaterialsElectric ConductivityElectric Stimulation TherapyGuided Tissue RegenerationHumansPeripheral NervesPolymersBiocompatible MaterialsPolymers

Identifiers

PMID27278739
PMCPMC5266796
OpenAlexW2337137701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.