ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2025
Characteristics of Sciatic Nerve Repair With Neurolysis, End-to-end Repair, and Nerve Grafting: A Narrative Review.
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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sciatic nerve injury can be traumatic or iatrogenic and causes significant motor deficits. The objective was to conduct a narrative review of the effectiveness of neurolysis, end-to-end repair, and nerve grafting after isolated sciatic nerve injury. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase libraries were searched for studies evaluating functional outcomes after sciatic nerve injury following nerve grafting, neurolysis, or end-to-end repair. Results: A total of 92 patients across 11 studies treated with neurolysis (64%), nerve grafting (32%), and end-to-end repair (4%) were included. The most common mechanism of injury was iatrogenic. Patients had a mean Medical Research Council (MRC) score of 2.6 ± 1.6. The mean MRC scores for neurolysis, end-to-end repair, and nerve grafting patients were 2.9 ± 1.5, 3.3 ± 0.6, and 1.6 ± 1.6, respectively. Sixty-nine percent, 100%, and 40% of neurolysis, end-to-end repair, and nerve grafting patients, respectively, achieved good outcomes (MRC ≥ 3). Good outcomes were achieved in 72% of patients with a preoperative interval of 6 months or less, 61% with an interval of 7-12 months, and 0% with an interval greater than 12 months. Of patients with a graft length less than 12 cm, 43% achieved good outcomes, whereas 17% with lengths greater than 12 cm did. Conclusions: Patients with end-to-end repair achieved the best outcomes (MRC ≥ 3). A preoperative interval of 6 months or less and graft length less than 12 cm are more likely to be associated with better outcomes. There was no significant correlation between age, donor nerve, and mechanism of injury with final MRC scores.
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.