ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Nanotechnological Strategies to Promote Skeletal Muscle Regeneration in Aging.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During aging, skeletal muscle undergoes a decline in mass and strength. This condition, known as sarcopenia, involves many physiological and metabolic impairments, thus representing a healthcare, social, and economic burden. Various pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches have been explored to counteract sarcopenia; however, no definite treatment has so far been found. The present narrative review summarizes nanotechnology-based strategies designed to promote muscle preservation and functional recovery in aging. Synthetic organic or inorganic nanoconstructs and natural extracellular vesicles have been used as nanocarriers for drug delivery, have been active as intrinsic therapeutic agents, have been employed to build biomimetic nanoscaffolds to sustain muscle regeneration, or have been combined to form hybrid nanosystems with multiple therapeutic functions. These nanotools demonstrated promising results in vitro and in animal models, being able to counteract major factors responsible for sarcopenia, such as oxidative stress, inflammation, mitochondrial dysfunction, increased proteolysis, and impaired stem cell function. However, nanotools have mostly been tested on biological models far from the physiologically aged human muscle. Moreover, limitations still remain to be solved to make these nanotools suitable for regenerative medicine; in particular, the systemic administration requires nanoconstruct functionalization for skeletal muscle targeting, and proper clearance should be ensured to avoid toxicity and immunogenicity related to long-term use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.