Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26003541›Full record

ArticleJournal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale2015

Optimal site for facial nerve transection and neurorrhaphy: a randomized prospective animal study.

Adrian I Mendez, Hadi Seikaly, Vincent Biron, Lin-fu Zhu, David W J Côté

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 97% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adrian I MendezDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Room 1E4, WMC, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, AB, Canada. amendez@ualberta.ca.
Hadi SeikalyDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Room 1E4, WMC, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, AB, Canada. hadi.seikaly@albertahealthservices.ca.
Vincent BironDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Room 1E4, WMC, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, AB, Canada. vbiron@ualberta.ca.
Lin-fu ZhuDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Room 1E4, WMC, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, AB, Canada. lzhu@ualberta.ca.
David W J CôtéDivision of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Room 1E4, WMC, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, AB, Canada. drdavidcote@me.com.
University of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the first facial allograft transplantation was performed, several institutions have performed the procedure with the main objectives being restoration of the aesthetic appearance and expressive function of the face. The optimal location to transect the facial nerve during flap harvest in transplantation to preserve facial movement function is currently unknown. There are currently two primary methods to perform facial nerve neurorrhaphy between the donor and recipient-one protocol involves transection and repair of the facial nerve at the main trunk while the another protocol advocates for the neurorrhaphy to be performed distally at the main branches. The purpose of this study is to establish the optimal location for transection and repair of the facial nerve to optimize functional recovery of facial movement.

methodsA prospective randomized controlled trial using a rat model was performed. Two groups of 12 rats underwent facial nerve transection and subsequent repair either at the main trunk of the nerve (group 1) or 2 cm distally, at the main bifurcation (group 2). Primary outcome of nerve functional recovery was measured using a previously validated laser curtain model, which measured amplitude of whisking at 2, 4, and 6 post-operatively. The deflection of the laser curtain sent a digital signal that was interpreted by central computer software.

resultsAt week 2 post-nerve surgery, the average amplitude observed for group 1 and 2 was 4.4 and 10.8 degrees, respectively. At week 4, group 1 showed improvement with an average amplitude of 9.7 degrees, while group 2 displayed an average of 10.2 degrees. The week 6 results showed the greatest improvement from baseline for group 1. Group 1 and 2 had average amplitudes of 17.2 and 6.9 degrees, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after facial nerve surgery (p > 0.05).

conclusionsWe found no statistical difference between these two locations of nerve repair using identical methods. Therefore, the authors recommend a single versus multiple nerve repair technique. This finding has potential implications for future facial allograft transplantations and at minimum necessitates further study with long-term follow-up data.

Indexed as

AnimalsDisease Models, AnimalEstheticsFacial ExpressionFacial NerveFemaleMicrosurgeryNerve RegenerationProspective StudiesRandom AllocationRatsRats, WistarSurgical FlapsTissue and Organ HarvestingVibrissae

Identifiers

PMID26003541
PMCPMC4458006
OpenAlexW1520464659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.