Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39989892›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025

Sense and Sensibility: Nerve Tape-A More Efficient Alternative for Nerve Repair in Breast Reconstruction?

Malini Chinta, Theresa Webster, Hao Huang, Lisa Gfrerer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Malini ChintaFrom the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Theresa WebsterFrom the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Hao HuangFrom the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.
Lisa GfrererFrom the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Current methods of nerve coaptation, ranging from epineural microsuture to fibrin glue, are either technically challenging or inadequate in providing robust repair. Nerve Tape, a novel sutureless nerve coaptation device, addresses these shortcomings by enabling rapid application while still preserving high-quality nerve repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the speed and quality of nerve repair between Nerve Tape and the traditional microsuture in patients who undergo cancer-related and gender-affirming mastectomies with chest/breast reinnervation. Methods: Fourteen surgeon participants performed direct coaptations between the lateral cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves and either medial intercostal nerve branch autograft or allograft. Neurorrhaphy was randomized and performed with microsuture on 1 breast/chest and Nerve Tape on the contralateral breast/chest. Repair time and repair quality, graded with a standardized neurorrhaphy grading scale, were compared between the 2 repair methods. Results: The mean repair time using Nerve Tape and microsuture was 1.79 and 5.20 minutes, respectively. Nerve Tape repair required less than half the time of microsuture repair for trainees of all postgraduate year levels. The repair quality was excellent or good in 92% of Nerve Tape coaptations and 69% of microsuture repairs. Conclusions: Nerve Tape enables faster repair times and higher rates of clinically acceptable nerve coaptation, regardless of the surgeon's level of experience. This sutureless technology proves to be a potentially promising alternative to traditional microsurgical suture repair, though more studies are needed to establish a correlation with clinical outcomes.

Identifiers

PMID39989892
PMCPMC11845205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.