Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28058042›Full record

ArticleEuropean surgery : ACA : Acta chirurgica Austriaca2016

Experimental nerve transfer model in the rat forelimb.

K D Bergmeister, M Aman, O Riedl, K Manzano-Szalai, M E Sporer, S Salminger, O C Aszmann

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European surgery : ACA : Acta chirurgica Austriaca, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Experimental nerve transfer model in the neonatal rat.Neural regeneration research · 2022
    Article
  3. Current neuropharmacology · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

K D BergmeisterCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria ; Division of Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
M AmanCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
O RiedlCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria ; Christian Doppler Laboratory for Restoration of Extremity Function, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
K Manzano-SzalaiCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
M E SporerCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
S SalmingerCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria ; Christian Doppler Laboratory for Restoration of Extremity Function, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
O C AszmannCD Laboratory for the Restoration of Extremity Function, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria ; Christian Doppler Laboratory for Restoration of Extremity Function, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNerve transfers are a powerful tool in extremity reconstruction, but the neurophysiological effects have not been adequately investigated. As 81 % of nerve injuries and most nerve transfers occur in the upper extremity with its own neurophysiological properties, the standard rat hindlimb model may not be optimal in this paradigm. Here we present an experimental rat forelimb model to investigate nerve transfers.

methodsIn ten male Sprague-Dawley rats, the ulnar nerve was transferred to the motor branch of long head of the biceps. Sham surgery was performed in five animals (exposure/closure). After 12 weeks of regeneration, muscle force and Bertelli test were performed and evaluated.

resultsThe nerve transfer successfully reinnervated the long head of the biceps in all animals, as indicated by muscle force and behavioral outcome. No aberrant reinnervation occurred from the original motor source. Muscle force was 2,68 N ± 0.35 for the nerve transfer group and 2,85 N ± 0.39 for the sham group, which was not statically different (

conclusionThe above-described rat model demonstrated a constant anatomy, suitable for nerve transfers that are accessible to standard neuromuscular analyses and behavioral testing. This model allows the study of both neurophysiologic properties and cognitive motor function after nerve transfers in the upper extremity.

Indexed as

Extremity reconstructionNerve transfersPeripheral nerve surgeryRat nerve transfer modelTargeted muscle reinnervation

Identifiers

PMID28058042
PMCPMC5167219
OpenAlexW2295218884

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.