ArticleNeural regeneration research2017
End-to-side neurorrhaphy repairs peripheral nerve injury: sensory nerve induces motor nerve regeneration.
Article in Neural regeneration research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research status of facial nerve repair.Regenerative therapy · 2023Review
- Review
- The Neurotrophic Effects and Mechanism of Action for FK1706 in Neurorrhaphy Rat Models and SH-SY5Y Cells.Neurochemical research · 2021Article
- Combined Use of Chitosan and Olfactory Mucosa Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cells to Promote Peripheral Nerve RegenerationStem cells international · 2021Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
End-to-side neurorrhaphy is an option in the treatment of the long segment defects of a nerve. It involves suturing the distal stump of the disconnected nerve (recipient nerve) to the side of the intimate adjacent nerve (donor nerve). However, the motor-sensory specificity after end-to-side neurorrhaphy remains unclear. This study sought to evaluate whether cutaneous sensory nerve regeneration induces motor nerves after end-to-side neurorrhaphy. Thirty rats were randomized into three groups: (1) end-to-side neurorrhaphy using the ulnar nerve (mixed sensory and motor) as the donor nerve and the cutaneous antebrachii medialis nerve as the recipient nerve; (2) the sham group: ulnar nerve and cutaneous antebrachii medialis nerve were just exposed; and (3) the transected nerve group: cutaneous antebrachii medialis nerve was transected and the stumps were turned over and tied. At 5 months, acetylcholinesterase staining results showed that 34% ± 16% of the myelinated axons were stained in the end-to-side group, and none of the myelinated axons were stained in either the sham or transected nerve groups. Retrograde fluorescent tracing of spinal motor neurons and dorsal root ganglion showed the proportion of motor neurons from the cutaneous antebrachii medialis nerve of the end-to-side group was 21% ± 5%. In contrast, no motor neurons from the cutaneous antebrachii medialis nerve of the sham group and transected nerve group were found in the spinal cord segment. These results confirmed that motor neuron regeneration occurred after cutaneous nerve end-to-side neurorrhaphy.
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.