ArticleMicrosurgery2011
Effect of sialodacryoadenitis virus infection on axonal regeneration.
Article in Microsurgery, 2011. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The effect of sialodacryoadenitis virus (SDAV) infection on axonal regeneration and functional recovery was investigated in male Lewis rats. Animals underwent unilateral tibial nerve transection, immediate repair, and treatment with either FK506 (treated) or control vehicle (untreated). Serial walking track analyses were performed to assess functional recovery. Nerves were harvested for morphometric analysis on postoperative day 18 after an SDAV outbreak occurred that affected the 12 experimental animals. Histomorphometry and walking track data were compared against 36 historical controls. Rats infected with SDAV demonstrated severely impaired axonal regeneration and diminished functional recovery. Total fiber counts, nerve density, and percent neural tissue were all significantly reduced in infected animals (P < 0.05). Active SDAV infection severely impaired nerve regeneration and negated the positive effect of FK506 on nerve regeneration in rats. Immunosuppressive risks must be weighed carefully against the potential neuroregenerative benefits in the treatment of peripheral nerve injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.