ArticleNeural regeneration research2015
Femoral nerve regeneration and its accuracy under different injury mechanisms.
Article in Neural regeneration research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facial reanimation with interposition nerve graft or masseter nerve transfer: a comparative retrospective study.Neural regeneration research · 2022Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical accuracy has greatly improved with the advent of microsurgical techniques. However, complete functional recovery after peripheral nerve injury has not been achieved to date. The mechanisms hindering accurate regeneration of damaged axons after peripheral nerve injury are in urgent need of exploration. The present study was designed to explore the mechanisms of peripheral nerve regeneration after different types of injury. Femoral nerves of rats were injured by crushing or freezing. At 2, 3, 6, and 12 weeks after injury, axons were retrogradely labeled using 1,1'-dioctadecyl-3,3,3',3'-tetramethylindocarbocyanine perchlorate (Dil) and True Blue, and motor and sensory axons that had regenerated at the site of injury were counted. The number and percentage of Dil-labeled neurons in the anterior horn of the spinal cord increased over time. No significant differences were found in the number of labeled neurons between the freeze and crush injury groups at any time point. Our results confirmed that the accuracy of peripheral nerve regeneration increased with time, after both crush and freeze injury, and indicated that axonal regeneration accuracy was still satisfactory after freezing, despite the prolonged damage.
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.