Cited by 630Nerve injury and regenerationTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineNeuroscience and Neural Engineering

Neural tissue engineering options for peripheral nerve regeneration

Gu, Xiaosong, Ding, Fei, Williams, David F.·2014·Biomaterials

Abstract

Tissue engineered nerve grafts (TENGs) have emerged as a potential alternative to autologous nerve grafts, the gold standard for peripheral nerve repair. Typically, TENGs are composed of a biomaterial-based template that incorporates biochemical cues. A number of TENGs have been used experimentally to bridge long peripheral nerve gaps in various animal models, where the desired outcome is nerve tissue regeneration and functional recovery. So far, the translation of TENGs to the clinic for use in humans has met with a certain degree of success. In order to optimize the TENG design and further approach the matching of TENGs with autologous nerve grafts, many new cues, beyond the traditional ones, will have to be integrated into TENGs. Furthermore, there is a strong requirement for monitoring the real-time dynamic information related to the construction of TENGs. The aim of this opinion paper is to specifically and critically describe the latest advances in the field of neural tissue engineering for peripheral nerve regeneration. Here we delineate new attempts in the design of template (or scaffold) materials, especially in the context of biocompatibility, the choice and handling of support cells, and growth factor release systems. We further discuss the significance of RNAi for peripheral nerve regeneration, anticipate the potential application of RNAi reagents for TENGs, and speculate on the possible contributions of additional elements, including angiogenesis, electrical stimulation, molecular inflammatory mediators, bioactive peptides, antioxidant reagents, and cultured biological constructs, to TENGs. Finally, we consider that a diverse array of physicochemical and biological cues must be orchestrated within a TENG to create a self-consistent coordinated system with a close proximity to the regenerative microenvironment of the peripheral nervous system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2014.04.064

Cites

280 of 280 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Degradation rate of PLCL must be carefully matched to regeneration rate of peripheral nerves; excessively rapid degradation leads to loss of mechanical support and acidic products adversely affect nerve growth; too long degradation time may interfere with growth of new nerve tissue.

    “First, the degradation rate of PLCL must be carefully matched to the regeneration rate of peripheral nerves. Excessively rapid degradation will lead to the loss of mechanical support of scaffolds, and the acidic products generated by the degradation of PLCL will also adversely affect nerve growth. Too long degradation time may also interfere with the growth of new nerve tissue [179].”
  • For peripheral nerve regeneration, scaffolds must provide suitable external environment for nerve fiber growth, using biomaterials to bridge gap between interrupted nerve fibers, and possess sufficient mechanical strength to protect damaged nerve tissue from secondary compression and invasion.

    “For peripheral nerve regeneration, these scaffolds must first provide a suitable external environment for nerve fiber growth, using biomaterials to bridge the gap between interrupted nerve fibers. They should also possess sufficient mechanical strength to protect the damaged nerve tissue from secondary compression and invasion by surrounding tissues [179].”

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gu, X., Ding, F., & Williams, D. F.
Affiliations
  • Nantong University (CN)
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
Venue
Biomaterials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
35
Issue
24
Pages
6143-6156
ISSN
0142-9612 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985525878
Cited by
630
References
280
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 57 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 9
FWCI
4.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biomaterials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Key Basic Research Program of China (2014CB542202)
  • Hi-Tech Research and Development Program of China (2012AA020502)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81130080, 81171180)
  • Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Nerve injury and regeneration
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
Keywords
peripheral nerve regeneration, tissue-engineered nerve grafts, neural scaffolds, biocompatibility, supporting cells, growth factor release, RNA interference, angiogenesis, electrical stimulation, inflammatory mediators, bioactive peptides, autologous nerve graft, functional recovery
MeSH terms
Animals, Biocompatible Materials, Humans, Nerve Regeneration, Peripheral Nerves, Tissue Engineering, RNA Interference, Tissue Scaffolds

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review