ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Pilot Study: A Multicenter, Prospective Study Demonstrating Safety, Usability, and Feasibility of Perioperative 1-hour Electrical Stimulation Therapy for Enhancing Peripheral Nerve Regeneration.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrical Stimulation Therapy to Accelerate Nerve Regeneration Remains Effective Following Postoperative Application of Lidocaine.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Advancing Peripheral Nerve Regeneration (Nerve SPACE 2025).Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Phase-Specific Evaluation of Sciatic Nerve Regeneration in Preclinical Studies: A Review of Functional Assessment, Emerging Therapies, and Translational Value.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Early Rehabilitation Versus Conventional Approaches in Post-Traumatic Hand Injuries with Multiple Lesions: Clinical Outcomes and Future Directions.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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: Electrical stimulation (ES) applied for 1 hour following surgical intervention enhances axonal regeneration and functional outcomes. Clinical implementation, however, has been hindered due to the lack of appropriately designed stimulators. Methods: This multicenter, prospective, open-label study aimed to demonstrate the safety and device feasibility of a novel, single-use stimulator for implementing perioperative ES therapy in a variety of upper extremity surgical procedures. Patients undergoing surgical intervention for upper extremity nerve injury, neuropathy, or lesions were included. An investigational version of a novel therapeutic peripheral nerve stimulator was used to deliver 1-hour ES therapy perioperatively. Safety was assessed by the cumulation of adverse events. Patient tolerance to ES therapy was obtained during the treatment, and pain was also assessed at the first postoperative visit. Device usability questionnaires were completed by the study surgeons. Results: A total of 25 patients were enrolled. There were no related adverse events or adverse device effects. Implementation of the device took less than 5 minutes in the operating room in most cases. Bipolar stimulation was preferred, with a mean ± SD stimulus level of 2.2 ± 0.7 mA, and therapy was well tolerated. The mean first postoperative pain score was 1.2 out of 10. Surgeons indicated that perioperative implementation of the therapeutic peripheral nerve stimulator was easy and did not cause major disruptions to the clinical workflow. Conclusions: Perioperative application of 1-hour ES therapy is a feasible, safe, and promising approach to enhancing peripheral nerve regeneration as an adjunct to surgical intervention.
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.