SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The potential of biomaterials for central nervous system cellular repair.

Neurochem Int · 2021-01-28

DOI: 10.1016/j.neuint.2021.104971PMID: 33515647

Check source for accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The central nervous system (CNS) can be injured or damaged through a variety of insults including traumatic injury, stroke, and neurodegenerative or demyelinating diseases, including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis. Existing pharmacological and other therapeutics strategies are limited in their ability to repair or regenerate damaged CNS tissue meaning there are significant unmet clinical needs facing patients suffering CNS damage and/or degeneration. Through a variety of mechanisms including neuronal replacement, secretion of therapeutic factors, and stimulation of host brain plasticity, cell-based repair offers a potential mechanism to repair and heal the damaged CNS. However, over the decades of its evolution as a therapeutic strategy, cell-based CNS repair has faced significant hurdles that have prevented its translation to widespread clinical practice. In recent years, advances in cell technologies combined with advances in biomaterial-based regenerative medicine and tissue engineering have meant there is very real potential for many of these hurdles to be overcome. This review will provide an overview of the main CNS conditions that lend themselves to cellular repair and will then outline the potential of biomaterial-based approaches for improving the outcome of cellular repair in these conditions.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.