There has been research going on about the difference in reptilian and amphibian regeneration opposed to mammals for many decades now and news outlines always say that this could one day lead to something replicated in mammals. But have any advancements in replicating it in mammalian test subjects, opposed to simply understanding the difference between reptilian and mammalian regeneration ever been made?
The study of soft-tissue healing in animals besides humans has definitely informed what and when medical interventions are used in MSK healthcare. But even in the easier case of mere healing, most of the good animal model studies have led to only a kind of negative medical progress — i.e. they’ve given us reason to stop providing a medical treatment we previously thought might be beneficial.
Sticking with tendons for example. Docs used to be much more willing to give corticosteroid shots as a treatment for chronic tendinopathy, but more and more animal and clinical studies show that corticosteriods have a catabolic effect on tendons in the long-term and so should be used only when the short-term benefits are expected to be very large.
Medical interventions where regeneration in the context of injury is the specific goal (e.g. PRP and stem cell therapy) have a very mixed reputation within MSK circles, I believe — many clinicians seeing those treatments as basically a sham at this point.
To a limited extent, we do. There are some studies in which research groups try to enhance the regenerative capabilities of mammals in a way that resembles the regeneration seen in amphibians. See the journal article linked below, as an example.
It is important to keep such research in perspective. I see it as "proof-of-concept" research - studies with biologically intriguing findings that might amount someday to something effective, treatment-wise. For now though, regenerative therapies are underwhelming IMHO.
Fun fact: the way they were able to get those nice images of the collagen in the tendons was by utilizing an optical imaging method called Second Harmonic Generation. Collagen intrinsically produces a very strong SHG signal without the need to attach any labels to the collagen. SHG is also a 3D imaging method that can be used to image deep inside live tissues (instead of having to fix, section and label the tissue like most histology methods) and thus they were able to monitor the tendon repair over time in a living system.
8 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 42.0 ms ] threadI was surprised to see that the newt doesn't repair tendons with the same material. It uses a 'tendon-like collagenous tissue'.
Do they make all repairs with an analogous tissue or only select ones?
The study of soft-tissue healing in animals besides humans has definitely informed what and when medical interventions are used in MSK healthcare. But even in the easier case of mere healing, most of the good animal model studies have led to only a kind of negative medical progress — i.e. they’ve given us reason to stop providing a medical treatment we previously thought might be beneficial.
Sticking with tendons for example. Docs used to be much more willing to give corticosteroid shots as a treatment for chronic tendinopathy, but more and more animal and clinical studies show that corticosteriods have a catabolic effect on tendons in the long-term and so should be used only when the short-term benefits are expected to be very large.
Medical interventions where regeneration in the context of injury is the specific goal (e.g. PRP and stem cell therapy) have a very mixed reputation within MSK circles, I believe — many clinicians seeing those treatments as basically a sham at this point.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3152998/
It is important to keep such research in perspective. I see it as "proof-of-concept" research - studies with biologically intriguing findings that might amount someday to something effective, treatment-wise. For now though, regenerative therapies are underwhelming IMHO.