Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31571661›Full record

ArticleNeural regeneration research2020

Animal models used to study direct peripheral nerve repair: a systematic review.

Francisco Javier Vela, Guadalupe Martínez-Chacón, Alberto Ballestín, José Luis Campos, Francisco Miguel Sánchez-Margallo, Elena Abellán

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neural regeneration research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Nerve Tape Is an Effective Tool for Small Nerve Repair.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors.

Francisco Javier VelaDepartment of Microsurgery, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.
Guadalupe Martínez-ChacónDepartment of Microsurgery, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.
Alberto BallestínDepartment of Microsurgery, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.
José Luis CamposDepartment of Microsurgery, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.
Francisco Miguel Sánchez-MargalloScientific Director, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.
Elena AbellánDepartment of Microsurgery, Jesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Cáceres, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePeripheral nerve repair is required after traumatic injury. This common condition represents a major public health problem worldwide. Recovery after nerve repair depends on several factors, including the severity of the injury, the nerve involved, and the surgeon's technical skills. Despite the precise microsurgical repair of nerve lesions, adequate functional recovery is not always achieved and, therefore, the regeneration process and surgical techniques are still being studied. Pre-clinical animal models are essential for this research and, for this reason, the focus of the present systematic review (according to the PRISMA statement) was to analyze the different animal models used in pre-clinical peripheral nerve repair studies. DATA SOURCES: Original articles, published in English from 2000 to 2018, were collected using the Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases. DATA SELECTION: Only preclinical trials on direct nerve repair were included in this review. The articles were evaluated by the first two authors, in accordance with predefined data fields. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes included functional motor abilities, daily activity and regeneration rate. Secondary outcomes included coaptation technique and animal model.

resultsThis review yielded 267 articles, of which, after completion of the screening, 49 studies were analyzed. There were 1425 animals in those 49 studies, being rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, cats and dogs the different pre-clinical models. The nerves used were classified into three groups: head and neck (11), forelimb (8) and hindlimb (30). The techniques used to perform the coaptation were: microsuture (46), glue (12), laser (8) and mechanical (2). The follow-up examinations were histology (43), electrophysiological analysis (24) and behavioral observation (22).

conclusionThe most widely used animal model in the study of peripheral nerve repair is the rat. Other animal models are also used but the cost-benefit of the rat model provides several strengths over the others. Suture techniques are currently the first option for nerve repair, but the use of glues, lasers and bioengineering materials is increasing. Hence, further research in this field is required to improve clinical practice.

Indexed as

animal modelcoaptationdirect nerve repairmicrosurgerynerveperipheral nervePRISMAreconstructionregenerationrepairsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID31571661
PMCPMC6921335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.