Controlled local release of PPARγ agonists from biomaterials to treat peripheral nerve injury.

OBJECTIVE: Poor clinical outcomes following peripheral nerve injury (PNI) are partly attributable to the limited rate of neuronal regeneration. Despite numerous potential drug candidates demonstrating positive effects on nerve regeneration rate in preclinical models, no drugs are routinely used to improve restoration of function in clinical practice. A key challenge associated with clinical adoption of drug treatments in nerve injured patients is the requirement for sustained administration of doses associated with undesirable systemic sideeffects. Local controlled-release drug delivery systems could potentially address this challenge, particularly through the use of biomaterials that can be implanted at the repair site during the microsurgical repair procedure. APPROACH: In order to test this concept, this study used various biomaterials to deliver ibuprofen sodium or sulindac sulfide locally in a controlled manner in a rat sciatic nerve injury model. Following characterisation of release parameters in vitro, ethylene vinyl acetate tubes or polylactic-co-glycolic acid wraps, loaded with ibuprofen sodium or sulindac sulfide, were placed around directly-repaired nerve transection or nerve crush injuries in rats. MAIN RESULTS: Ibuprofen sodium, but not sulindac sulfide caused an increase in neurites in distal nerve segments and improvements in functional recovery in comparison to controls with no drug treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: This study showed for the first time that local delivery of ibuprofen sodium using biomaterials improves neurite growth and functional recovery following PNI and provides the basis for future development of drug-loaded biomaterials suitable for clinical translation.

Quantifying regeneration in patients following peripheral nerve injury.

Healthy nerve function provides humans with the control of movement; sensation (such as pain, touch and temperature) and the quality of skin, hair and nails. Injury to this complex system creates a deficit in function, which is slow to recover, and rarely, if ever, returns to what patients consider to be normal. Despite promising results in pre-clinical animal experimentation effective translation is challenged by a current inability to quantify nerve regeneration in human subjects and relate this to measurable and responsible clinical outcomes. In animal models, muscle and nerve tissue samples can be harvested following experimental intervention. This allows direct quantification of muscle mass and quality and quantity of regeneration of axons; such an approach is not applicable in human medicine as it would ensure a significant functional deficit. Nevertheless a greater understanding of this process would allow the relationship that exists between neural and neuromuscular regeneration and functional outcome to be more clearly understood. This article presents a combined commentary of current practice from a specialist clinical unit and research team with regard to laboratory and clinical quantification of nerve regeneration. We highlight how electrophysiological diagnostic methods (which are used with significant recognised limitations in the assessment of clinical medicine) can potentially be used with more validity to interpret and assess the processes of neural regeneration in the clinical context, thus throwing light on the factors at play in translating lab advances into the clinic.