ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Biomechanical Evaluation of an Atraumatic Polymer-assisted Peripheral Nerve Repair System Compared with Conventional Neurorrhaphy Techniques.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel Sutureless Hydrogel Device for Peripheral Nerve Repair.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Sutureless Approach to Nerve Repair: Results From a Clinical Study in Digital Nerves.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- A Novel Atraumatic Polymer-Assisted Peripheral Nerve Repair Device Compared With Microsurgical Neurorrhaphy.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Microsuturing, the gold standard for peripheral nerve repair, can create tension and damage at the repair site, potentially impacting regeneration and causing neuroma formation. A sutureless and atraumatic polymer-assisted system was developed to address this challenge and support peripheral nerve repair. The system is based on a biocompatible and biodegradable biosynthetic polymer and consists of a coaptation chamber and a light-activated polymer for securing to the nerve. In this study, we compare the system's biomechanical performance and mechanism of action to microsutures and fibrin repairs. Methods: The system's fixation force was compared with microsutures and fibrin glue, and evaluated across various nerve diameters through tensile testing. Tension and tissue morphology at the repair site were assessed using finite element modeling and scanning electron microscopy. Results: The fixation force of the polymer-assisted repair was equivalent to microsutures and superior to fibrin glue. This force increased linearly with nerve diameter, highlighting the correlation between polymer surface contact area and performance. Finite element modeling analysis showed stress concentration at the repair site for microsuture repairs, whereas the polymer-assisted repair dissipated stress along the nerve, away from the repair site. Morphological analysis revealed nerve alignment with no tissue trauma for the polymer-assisted repair, unlike microsutures. Conclusions: The mechanical performance of the polymer-assisted coaptation system is suitable for peripheral nerve repair. The achieved fixation forces are equivalent to those of microsutures and superior to fibrin glue, minimizing stress concentration at the repair site and avoiding trauma to the severed nerve ends.
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.