ArticleTissue engineering and regenerative medicine2021
Peripheral Nerve Regeneration Using a Nerve Conduit with Olfactory Ensheathing Cells in a Rat Model.
Article in Tissue engineering and regenerative medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Cells, Biomaterials, and Advanced Engineering for Next-Generation Peripheral Nerve Repair.Cells, tissues, organs · 2026Review
- Wireless Acousto-Piezoelectric Conduit with Aligned Nanofibers for Neural Regeneration.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025Article
- Optimizing Peripheral Nerve Regeneration: Surgical Techniques, Biomolecular and Regenerative Strategies-A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Engineered bio-functional material-based nerve guide conduits for optic nerve regeneration: a view from the cellular perspective, challenges and the future outlook.Regenerative biomaterials · 2025Review
- Olfactory ensheathing cells and neuropathic pain.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023Review
- Potential therapeutic effect of olfactory ensheathing cells in neurological diseases: neurodegenerative diseases and peripheral nerve injuries.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Neuron-fibrous scaffold interfaces in the peripheral nervous system: a perspective on the structural requirements.Neural regeneration research · 2022Review
- Donors for nerve transplantation in craniofacial soft tissue injuries.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- The balanced microenvironment regulated by the degradants of appropriate PLGA scaffolds and chitosan conduit promotes peripheral nerve regeneration.Materials today. Bio · 2021Article
- Elucidating the Pivotal Neuroimmunomodulation of Stem Cells in Spinal Cord Injury Repair.Stem cells international · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutologous nerve grafts are the gold standard treatment for peripheral nerve injury treatment. However, this procedure cannot avoid sacrificing other nerves as a major limitation. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the potential of olfactory ensheathing cells (OECs) embedded in a nerve conduit.
methodsA 10-mm segment of the sciatic nerve was resected in 21 rats, and the nerve injury was repaired with one of the following (n = 7 per group): autologous nerve graft, poly (ε-caprolactone) (PCL) conduit and OECs, and PCL conduit only. The consequent effect on nerve regeneration was measured based on the nerve conduction velocity (NCV), amplitude of the compound muscle action potential (ACMAP), wet muscle weight, histomorphometric analysis, and nerve density quantification.
resultsHistomorphometric analysis revealed nerve regeneration and angiogenesis in all groups. However, there were significant differences (p < 0.05) in the ACMAP nerve regeneration rate of the gastrocnemius and tibialis anterior muscles between the autologous graft (37.9 ± 14.3% and 39.1% ± 20.4%) and PCL only (17.8 ± 8.6% and 13.6 ± 5.8%) groups, and between the PCL only and PCL + OECs (46.3 ± 20.0% and 34.5 ± 14.6%) groups, with no differences between the autologous nerve and PCL + OEC groups (p > 0.05). No significant results in NCV, wet muscle weight, and nerve density quantification were observed among the 3 groups.
conclusionA PCL conduit with OECs enhances the regeneration of injured peripheral nerves, offering a good alternative to autologous nerve grafts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.