比较电刺激、磁刺激和光遗传刺激用于周围神经修复的系统性综述

Q3 Medicine
Priya Kaluskar MS , Dhruv Bharadwaj BPhil , K. Swaminathan Iyer PhD , Christopher Dy MD, MPH , Minghao Zheng MD, PhD , David M. Brogan MD, MSc
{"title":"比较电刺激、磁刺激和光遗传刺激用于周围神经修复的系统性综述","authors":"Priya Kaluskar MS ,&nbsp;Dhruv Bharadwaj BPhil ,&nbsp;K. Swaminathan Iyer PhD ,&nbsp;Christopher Dy MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Minghao Zheng MD, PhD ,&nbsp;David M. Brogan MD, MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.jhsg.2024.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the currently available evidence for the use of external stimulation to modulate neural activity and promote peripheral nerve regeneration. The most common external stimulations are electrical stimulation (ES), optogenetic stimulation (OS), and magnetic stimulation (MS). Understanding the comparative effectiveness of these stimulation methods is pivotal in advancing therapeutic interventions for peripheral nerve injuries. This systematic review focused on these three external stimulation modalities as potential strategies to enhance peripheral nerve repair (PNR). We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework to systematically evaluate and compare the efficiency of ES, OS, and MS in PNR. The review included studies published between 2018 and 2023 using ES, OS, or MS for PNR focused on enhancing recovery of peripheral nerve injuries in rodent models identified through PubMed and Google Scholar. The search strategies and inclusion criteria identified 19 studies (13 ES, 4 OS, and 2 MS) for detailed analysis, focusing on critical parameters such as functional recovery, histological outcomes, and electrophysiological data. Although ES demonstrated a consistent improvement in all the analyses, high-frequency repetitive MS (HFr-MS) emerged as a promising modality. HFr-MS demonstrated accelerated PNR, as histological and electrophysiological evidence indicated. In contrast, OS exhibited superior functional recovery outcomes. Notable limitations include constrained MS and OS data sets and the challenge of comparing relative improvements because of methodological diversity in evaluation techniques. Our findings underscore the potential of HFr-MS and OS in PNR while emphasizing the critical need for standardized testing protocols to facilitate meaningful cross-study comparisons. External stimulations have the potential to improve functional recovery in patients with nerve injury.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36920,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","volume":"6 5","pages":"Pages 722-739"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589514124000604/pdfft?md5=ec5381a971fa8cb2d30a3ac1dea01b1c&pid=1-s2.0-S2589514124000604-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review to Compare Electrical, Magnetic, and Optogenetic Stimulation for Peripheral Nerve Repair\",\"authors\":\"Priya Kaluskar MS ,&nbsp;Dhruv Bharadwaj BPhil ,&nbsp;K. Swaminathan Iyer PhD ,&nbsp;Christopher Dy MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Minghao Zheng MD, PhD ,&nbsp;David M. Brogan MD, MSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhsg.2024.03.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the currently available evidence for the use of external stimulation to modulate neural activity and promote peripheral nerve regeneration. The most common external stimulations are electrical stimulation (ES), optogenetic stimulation (OS), and magnetic stimulation (MS). Understanding the comparative effectiveness of these stimulation methods is pivotal in advancing therapeutic interventions for peripheral nerve injuries. This systematic review focused on these three external stimulation modalities as potential strategies to enhance peripheral nerve repair (PNR). We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework to systematically evaluate and compare the efficiency of ES, OS, and MS in PNR. The review included studies published between 2018 and 2023 using ES, OS, or MS for PNR focused on enhancing recovery of peripheral nerve injuries in rodent models identified through PubMed and Google Scholar. The search strategies and inclusion criteria identified 19 studies (13 ES, 4 OS, and 2 MS) for detailed analysis, focusing on critical parameters such as functional recovery, histological outcomes, and electrophysiological data. Although ES demonstrated a consistent improvement in all the analyses, high-frequency repetitive MS (HFr-MS) emerged as a promising modality. HFr-MS demonstrated accelerated PNR, as histological and electrophysiological evidence indicated. In contrast, OS exhibited superior functional recovery outcomes. Notable limitations include constrained MS and OS data sets and the challenge of comparing relative improvements because of methodological diversity in evaluation techniques. Our findings underscore the potential of HFr-MS and OS in PNR while emphasizing the critical need for standardized testing protocols to facilitate meaningful cross-study comparisons. External stimulations have the potential to improve functional recovery in patients with nerve injury.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online\",\"volume\":\"6 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 722-739\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589514124000604/pdfft?md5=ec5381a971fa8cb2d30a3ac1dea01b1c&pid=1-s2.0-S2589514124000604-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589514124000604\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589514124000604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本系统综述旨在评估目前使用外部刺激调节神经活动和促进周围神经再生的可用证据。最常见的外部刺激包括电刺激(ES)、光遗传刺激(OS)和磁刺激(MS)。了解这些刺激方法的比较效果对于促进周围神经损伤的治疗干预至关重要。本系统综述重点关注这三种外部刺激方式,将其作为加强周围神经修复(PNR)的潜在策略。我们采用系统综述和荟萃分析的首选报告项目框架,对 ES、OS 和 MS 在 PNR 中的效率进行了系统评估和比较。该综述纳入了 2018 年至 2023 年间发表的使用 ES、OS 或 MS 进行 PNR 的研究,这些研究侧重于通过 PubMed 和谷歌学术(Google Scholar)确定的啮齿类动物模型中增强周围神经损伤的恢复。搜索策略和纳入标准确定了 19 项研究(13 项 ES、4 项 OS 和 2 项 MS)进行详细分析,重点关注功能恢复、组织学结果和电生理数据等关键参数。尽管 ES 在所有分析中都表现出一致的改善,但高频重复 MS(HFr-MS)成为一种很有前景的治疗方式。组织学和电生理学证据表明,HFr-MS 加速了 PNR。相比之下,OS 表现出更优越的功能恢复效果。值得注意的局限性包括 MS 和 OS 数据集受到限制,以及由于评估技术方法的多样性而难以比较相对改善情况。我们的研究结果凸显了 HFr-MS 和 OS 在 PNR 中的潜力,同时也强调了标准化测试协议的重要性,以便进行有意义的跨研究比较。外部刺激有可能改善神经损伤患者的功能恢复。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Systematic Review to Compare Electrical, Magnetic, and Optogenetic Stimulation for Peripheral Nerve Repair

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the currently available evidence for the use of external stimulation to modulate neural activity and promote peripheral nerve regeneration. The most common external stimulations are electrical stimulation (ES), optogenetic stimulation (OS), and magnetic stimulation (MS). Understanding the comparative effectiveness of these stimulation methods is pivotal in advancing therapeutic interventions for peripheral nerve injuries. This systematic review focused on these three external stimulation modalities as potential strategies to enhance peripheral nerve repair (PNR). We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework to systematically evaluate and compare the efficiency of ES, OS, and MS in PNR. The review included studies published between 2018 and 2023 using ES, OS, or MS for PNR focused on enhancing recovery of peripheral nerve injuries in rodent models identified through PubMed and Google Scholar. The search strategies and inclusion criteria identified 19 studies (13 ES, 4 OS, and 2 MS) for detailed analysis, focusing on critical parameters such as functional recovery, histological outcomes, and electrophysiological data. Although ES demonstrated a consistent improvement in all the analyses, high-frequency repetitive MS (HFr-MS) emerged as a promising modality. HFr-MS demonstrated accelerated PNR, as histological and electrophysiological evidence indicated. In contrast, OS exhibited superior functional recovery outcomes. Notable limitations include constrained MS and OS data sets and the challenge of comparing relative improvements because of methodological diversity in evaluation techniques. Our findings underscore the potential of HFr-MS and OS in PNR while emphasizing the critical need for standardized testing protocols to facilitate meaningful cross-study comparisons. External stimulations have the potential to improve functional recovery in patients with nerve injury.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信