Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35628484›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2022

Fascial Innervation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Vidina Suarez-Rodriguez, Caterina Fede, Carmelo Pirri, Lucia Petrelli, Juan Francisco Loro-Ferrer, David Rodriguez-Ruiz, Raffaele De Caro, Carla Stecco

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
9.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

72 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Low Back Pain in Cycling. Are There Differences between Road and Mountain Biking?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Erector spinae plane block.BJA education · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Vidina Suarez-RodriguezDoctorate School, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35001 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
Caterina FedeDepartment of Neurosciences, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4372-7889
Carmelo PirriDepartment of Neurosciences, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0119-6549
Lucia PetrelliDepartment of Neurosciences, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy.
Juan Francisco Loro-FerrerDepartment of Clinical Sciences, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35016 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0517-8209
David Rodriguez-RuizDepartment of Physical Education, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, 35017 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
Raffaele De CaroDepartment of Neurosciences, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2307-0277
Carla SteccoDepartment of Neurosciences, Institute of Human Anatomy, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8767-4555
University of Padua · ITUniversidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, myofascial pain has become one of the main problems in healthcare systems. Research into its causes and the structures related to it may help to improve its management. Until some years ago, all the studies were focused on muscle alterations, as trigger points, but recently, fasciae are starting to be considered a new, possible source of pain. This systematic review has been conducted for the purpose of analyze the current evidence of the muscular/deep fasciae innervation from a histological and/or immunohistochemical point of view. A literature search published between 2000 and 2021 was made in PubMed and Google Scholar. Search terms included a combination of fascia, innervation, immunohistochemical, and different immunohistochemical markers. Of the 23 total studies included in the review, five studies were performed in rats, four in mice, two in horses, ten in humans, and two in both humans and rats. There were a great variety of immunohistochemical markers used to detect the innervation of the fasciae; the most used were Protein Gene Marker 9.5 (used in twelve studies), Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (ten studies), S100 (ten studies), substance P (seven studies), and tyrosine hydroxylase (six studies). Various areas have been studied, with the thoracolumbar fascia being the most observed. Besides, the papers highlighted diversity in the density and type of innervation in the various fasciae, going from free nerve endings to Pacini and Ruffini corpuscles. Finally, it has been observed that the innervation is increased in the pathological fasciae. From this review, it is evident that fasciae are well innerved, their innervation have a particular distribution and precise localization and is composed especially by proprioceptors and nociceptors, the latter being more numerous in pathological situations. This could contribute to a better comprehension and management of pain.

Indexed as

FasciaMusculoskeletal Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsHorsesMechanoreceptorsMicePainRatsSensory Receptor Cellsfasciainnervationnociceptorpain

Identifiers

PMID35628484
PMCPMC9143136
OpenAlexW4280564221

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.