ArticleWorld journal of surgery2020
A New Synthetic Conduit for the Treatment of Peripheral Nerve Injuries.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2020. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Peripheral Nerve Regeneration Reimagined: Cutting-Edge Biomaterials and Biotechnological Innovations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Study of the Physico-Mechanical Properties and Oxygen Permeability of Bacterial-Cellulose-Based Conduits.Polymers · 2025Article
- Adhesive chitosan-based hybrid biohydrogels for peripheral nerve injury repair.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024Review
- Electrospun conductive nanofiber yarns for accelerating mesenchymal stem cells differentiation and maturation into Schwann cell-like cells under a combination of electrical stimulation and chemical induction.Acta biomaterialia · 2022Article
- Natural-Based Biomaterials for Peripheral Nerve Injury Repair.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeripheral nerve defects (PND) often cause lifelong physical disability, and the available treatment options are often not satisfactory. PND are usually bridged with an autologous nerve transplant or a nerve guidance conduit (NGC), when coaptation as preferred technique is not possible. The aim of this experimental study was to determine the effectiveness of a novel NGC for regeneration in the treatment of PND. MATERIALS AND
methodsA conduit made of gelatin with an innovative interior structure was tested for the repair of a 6-mm gap versus direct microsurgical suture repair without gap.
resultsWe found that bridging the defect with this conduit was as effective as direct microsurgical coaptation without a defect.
conclusionsThis nerve conduit, effective in bridging neural defects, appears as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts, avoiding the problems related to nerve graft harvesting, host-donor differences in diameter, mismatches in number and pattern of fascicles, cross-sectional shape and area, and morbidity of the donor area.
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.