ReviewJournal of materials chemistry. B2025
Facial nerve pathology: emerging strategies for regeneration and functional restoration.
Review in Journal of materials chemistry. B, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Facial nerve injuries cause significant functional impairments, affect facial expressions, speech, and overall quality of life. This article explores advances in facial nerve regeneration, encompassing both conventional and emerging therapeutic strategies. The regenerative process involves Wallerian degeneration, axonal regrowth, and target muscle reinnervation, where the distal axon degrades and the proximal axon initiates sprouting to restore connectivity. Traditional treatments, including direct nerve repair, autologous grafts, nerve transfers, and rehabilitation, vary in efficacy based on injury severity and timing. Recent innovations in biomaterials, such as collagen scaffolds, synthetic polymers, and graphene-enhanced conduits, provide structural and biochemical support for nerve repair. Electrical stimulation has shown promise in accelerating regeneration by modulating neurotrophic factor expression and guiding axonal growth. Advanced therapies, including stem cell-based interventions, exosome-mediated treatments, and intensive neurorehabilitation, offer new prospects for enhanced recovery. Despite progress, challenges remain in standardizing treatments, ensuring clinical translation, and improving long-term efficacy. This review highlights preclinical models used to assess functional outcomes, discusses bioengineered materials tailored for nerve repair, and explores future directions in processed nerve allografts, bioengineered conduits, and biochemical cues to enhance neural regeneration after facial nerve injury.
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.