Table 1.

Pros and cons of the viral and non-viral delivery carrier used for CRISPR/Cas9 delivery to the eye.

Delivery vehicle	Pros	Cons
Viral vectors (Lentivirus, Adenovirus, baculovirus)	•High transfection ex vivo •High efficiency	•Risk of insertion mutagenesis [13] •Immune response [13] •Low loading efficiency •Low in vivo efficiency •Difficult to handle •High cost •Cannot deliver RNPs
Non-Viral vectors (Polymeric nanoparticles, dendrimers, exosomes, Liposomes, Lipid nanoparticle, polymeric micelles)	•Low cost •Ease of handling and •Ease of preparation •High loading •Can be prepared for target delivery •Low immunogenicity •Can deliver RNPs •In vivo stability •Less risk of mutagenesis •Flexibility	•Comparative low efficiency and transfection •Toxicity •Scalability