ArticleThe archives of bone and joint surgery2015
Two-Stage Nerve Graft in Severe Scar: A Time-Course Study in a Rat Model.
Article in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collagen epineurial substitute-assisted neurorrhaphy is superior to conventional end-to-end neurorrhaphy in a rat model of peripheral nerve injury.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Article
- Induced Pseudomembrane Enrichment in Long Nerve Allograft Reconstruction.Muscle & nerve · 2025Article
- Article
- Endogenous automatic nerve discharge promotes nerve repair: an optimized animal model.Neural regeneration research · 2019Article
- Vascularization Strategies for Peripheral Nerve Tissue Engineering.Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeripheral nerve repair outcomes are suboptimal in the presence of severe soft tissue injury and excessive scarring paralleling the process in tendon reconstruction of the hand. Inspired by the advantages of the two-stage technique in tendon grafting and with encouraging preliminary results, we aimed to investigate the two-stage nerve grafting technique as an alternative method of secondary nerve repair.
methodsThirty female rats (~200 g) were randomly distributed into two groups (n=15). A 15 mm gap was created in the sciatic nerve of the animals and an excessive extraneural scar was induced using the "mincing" method. In this method, a thin strip of muscle was removed, minced in a petri dish and returned to the peripheral nerve. In the two-stage nerve graft group, a silicone tube was interposed in the first stage. After 4 weeks, in the second stage, the silicone tube was removed and a median nerve autograft was interposed through the newly formed vascularized sheath. In the conventional graft group, two nerve ends were protected with silicone caps in the first stage. After 4 weeks the caps were removed and the median graft was interposed. Behavioral assessments were performed at week 15 after surgery with the withdrawal reflex latency (WRL) and extensor postural thrust (EPT) and at the 3, 6 and 15-week time points with the TOA (toe out angle). Masson Trichrome staining method was used for histological assessments at week 15.
resultsAccording to the EPT and WRL, the two-stage nerve graft showed significant improvement (P=0.020 and P=0.017 respectively). The TOA showed no significant difference between the two groups. The total vascular index was significantly higher in the two-stage nerve graft group (P<0.001).
conclusionsTwo-stage nerve graft using a silicone tube enhances vascularity of the graft and improves functional recovery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26110172PMC4468622W1904192896What 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.