Narrative review reveals functional versatility but persistent evidence gaps for electrospun systems across heritage substrates, highlighting the need for validation against established treatments.
The preservation of cultural heritage is increasingly challenged by climate-driven environmental instability and the intrinsic vulnerability of organic, inorganic, and composite materials. Electrospinning enables the production of thin, porous, and functionally adaptable fibrous systems, yet their compatibility with conservation requirements remains uncertain. This critical narrative review examines the process principles relevant to conservation and evaluates reported applications for paper, textiles, wood, paintings and painted surfaces, stone and plaster, and metals. The literature is assessed by substrate type, application mode, conservation function, and material authenticity, distinguishing authentic historic materials, objects, or sites, artificially aged mock-ups, and contemporary model substrates, with potentially transferable applications from adjacent fields considered separately. Reported functions include mechanical reinforcement, controlled cleaning and solvent delivery, antimicrobial protection, hydrophobic surface modification, corrosion-inhibitor release, and diagnostic applications. Although these studies demonstrate the versatility of electrospun systems, the evidence remains limited and uneven. Long-term aging, removability, residue formation, visual and tactile effects, active-agent migration, and comparisons with established treatments are insufficiently investigated. Temporary freestanding systems intended for removal represent promising, potentially less invasive research approaches, whereas substrate-retained systems carry a greater evidential burden. Electrospinning should therefore be regarded as an application-specific experimental platform requiring comparative and substrate-sensitive validation against established treatments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Žnidarič et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: