TABLE 1.
Summary of current physical processing methods for decellurized nerve xenograft.
| Method | Mechanism | Xenograft source | Advantages | Disadvantages | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freeze-thaw cycles | Intracellular crystallization causes cell death | porcine, rabbit, dog | easy, low-cost | limited ability to eliminate cells | Ide (1983), Ide, Tohyama, Yokota, Nitatori, & Onodera (1983), Osawa et al. (1990), Evans et al. (1998), Hess et al. (2007), Jesuraj et al. (2014), Kaizawa et al. (2017), Philips et al. (2018) |
| Sonication | rupture the cell membrane via generating acoustic cavitation | rabbit | low-cost; can shorten processing time | can’t remove DNA content | Hudson et al. (2004), Boriani et al. (2017), Bolognesi et al. (2022), Suss et al. (2022) |
| Perfusion | Pressure induced by perfusion via natural vasculature can remove cellular components | porcine | might overcome long nerve gap | surgical complexity, donor site morbidity and limited nerve availability | Wüthrich et al. (2020) |
| avoid ischemic damage and central necrosis | |||||
| Immersion and Agitation | isolate and remove cells from the tissue | rat | Easy, might overcome long nerve gap | Time consumable | Vasudevan et al. (2014) |
| Supercritical fluids | Uncertain | porcine | environmental friendly, nontoxicity, low cost, disinfection | low ability of defatting | Isenschmid et al. (1995), White et al. (2006), Casali et al. (2018), Topuz et al. (2020), Wei et al. (2022) |