SynthesisBMC veterinary research2026
Morpho-molecular assessment of nanomaterials in teleost fish wound healing: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC veterinary research, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTeleost fish skin is a vital barrier for regulating osmoregulation, immune defense, and respiration. Cutaneous wounds in farmed fish cause significant economic loss and welfare concerns, as standard treatments, like antibiotics and chemical baths, are often ineffective, toxic, and fail to adhere to mucus-covered surfaces. While nanomaterials show great promise for wound healing, current data on how they work in fish remain incomplete. This systematic review evaluates the performance of these nanomaterials, explains their healing mechanisms, and highlights the key research gaps to guide future aquaculture treatments.
resultsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we included twelve in vivo studies (2017-2026). A clear shift was observed over time: research before 2020 focused only on metallic nanoparticles (silver and zinc oxide), whereas recent studies have mostly used biopolymeric nano-delivery systems. Nanoparticle treatments consistently led to faster wound closure, with several formulas healing over 90% of the wound within two weeks; however, these quantitative outcomes are strictly descriptive due to high methodological heterogeneity across studies. Under the microscope, nanomaterials accelerated re-epithelialization, improved collagen organization, and reduced inflammation. At the molecular level, they decreased pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL1β, TNFα) and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPS), while increasing anti-inflammatory markers (IL10, TGF-β) and antioxidant enzymes (SOD, CAT). Transcriptomics data also showed the activation of fibroblast growth factor 7 (FGF7) and the Jak-STAT pathways. Finally, zebrafish (Danio rerio) constituted 75% of the study models, showing a major gap in research on farmed fish like Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus).
conclusionsThis systematic review shows that nanomaterials significantly accelerate teleost wound healing by promoting tissue regeneration and regulating the immune response. The shift toward biopolymeric systems, especially chitosan, indicates a clear trend toward safe and sustainable aquaculture medicine. Notably, testing hybrid nano-hyaluronic acid and nano-chitosan systems remains completely unexplored in farmed fish. This gap is important due to the complementary biological properties of these materials and the high global value of Nile tilapia. Testing this hybrid biomaterial under real farming conditions will help improve skin healing, support the immune system, and provide a safe wound treatment for global aquaculture.
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.