ArticleAnnals of plastic surgery2016
The Dilator Naris Muscle as a Reporter of Facial Nerve Regeneration in a Rat Model.
Article in Annals of plastic surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- SMILE: neural signal acquisition and intra-body transmission for facial nerve bypass-An acute feasibility study and proof-of-concept in a rat model.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- Selective Denervation of the Facial Dermato-Muscular Complex in the Rat: Experimental Model and Anatomical Basis.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2021Article
- Dual Convergence of Facial Nerve Branches Innervating Whisker Pad in Rats.Current medical science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveMany investigators study facial nerve regeneration using the rat whisker pad model, although widely standardized outcomes measures of facial nerve regeneration in the rodent have not yet been developed. The intrinsic whisker pad "sling" muscles producing whisker protraction, situated at the base of each individual whisker, are extremely small and difficult to study en bloc. Here, we compare the functional innervation of 2 potential reporter muscles for whisker pad innervation: the dilator naris (DN) and the levator labii superioris (LLS), to characterize facial nerve regeneration.
methodsMotor supply of the DN and LLS was elucidated by measuring contraction force and compound muscle action potentials during stimulation of individual facial nerve branches, and by measuring whisking amplitude before and after DN distal tendon release.
resultsThe pattern of DN innervation matched that of the intrinsic whisker pad musculature (ie, via the buccal and marginal mandibular branches of the facial nerve), whereas the LLS seemed to be innervated almost entirely by the zygomatic branch, whose primary target is the orbicularis oculi muscle.
conclusionsAlthough the LLS has been commonly used as a reporter muscle of whisker pad innervation, the present data show that its innervation pattern does not overlap substantially with the muscles producing whisker protraction. The DN muscle may serve as a more appropriate reporter for whisker pad innervation because it is innervated by the same facial nerve branches as the intrinsic whisker pad musculature, making structure/function correlations more accurate, and more relevant to investigators studying facial nerve regeneration.
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.