SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Neurodiagnostic and neurotherapeutic potential of graphene nanomaterials.

Biosens Bioelectron · 2023-12-10

DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2023.115906PMID: 38101185

Check source for accessReview; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

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

Graphene has emerged as a highly promising nanomaterial for a variety of advanced technologies, including batteries, energy, electronics, and biotechnologies. Its recent contribution to neurotechnology is particularly noteworthy because its superior conductivity, chemical resilience, biocompatibility, thermal stability, and scalable nature make it well-suited for measuring brain activity and plasticity in health and disease. Graphene-mediated compounds are microfabricated in two central methods: chemical processes with natural graphite and chemical vapor deposition of graphene in a film form. They are widely used as biosensors and bioelectronics for neurodiagnostic and neurotherapeutic purposes in several brain disorders, such as Parkinson's disease, stroke, glioma, epilepsy, tinnitus, and Alzheimer's disease. This review provides an overview of studies that have demonstrated the technical advances of graphene nanomaterials in neuroscientific and clinical applications. We also discuss current limitations and future demands in relation to the clinical application of graphene, highlighting its potential technological and clinical significance for treating brain disorders. Our review underscores the potential of graphene nanomaterials as powerful tools for advancing the understanding of the brain and developing new therapeutic strategies.

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.