ReviewJournal of functional biomaterials2025
Mechanistic Advancements and Translational Progress in Hyaluronic Acid-Based Scaffolds and Conduits for Peripheral Nerve Regeneration.
Review in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral nerve injuries often recover poorly. Hyaluronic acid (HA) biomaterials, with regenerative and anti-fibrotic properties, may augment repair. We performed a PRISMA-guided systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase (January 2000-August 2024), capturing in vitro, in vivo, and clinical investigations of HA in peripheral nerve repair; data on study context, interventions, and outcomes were extracted. Screening and extraction were performed in duplicate. Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Across in vitro and in vivo models, HA-based biomaterials consistently reduced perineural fibrosis, enhanced axonal regeneration, and improved SFI, CMAP, and NCV compared with conventional repair. Several HA hydrogels and composite conduits achieved functional outcomes approaching autografts, particularly when combined with exosomes, neurotrophic factors, or mechanobiologically tuned scaffolds. Early clinical studies demonstrated safety but remain limited by size and short follow-up. Overall, HA-containing biomaterials appear anti-fibrotic, neuroprotective, and pro-regenerative, supporting their promise as adjuncts for peripheral nerve reconstruction. For this to translate into clinical practice, future work should standardize formulations and dosing, employ rigorous, clinically relevant animal models with long-term endpoints, and advance well-powered, controlled trials to test effectiveness and durability in patients. Clinically, HA platforms show promise as anti-adhesion barriers after neurolysis and as biofunctional fillers/coatings for nerve conduits, but standardized formulations and adequately powered trials are needed to define indications and dosing.
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.