ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Repair of peripheral nerve defect with direct gradual lengthening of the nerve stumps: first clinical case series.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRepairing large nerve defects remains challenging, and no definitive method has been established. We developed a nerve lengthening device for humans and achieved nerve defect repair through nerve lengthening in three cases. The purpose of this report is to describe the clinical course of three cases treated by nerve lengthening and to discuss its effectiveness in the treatment of nerve defects.
methodsThe target population included males and females aged 20-65 years with peripheral nerve injuries that cannot undergo primary suturing in the limbs were recruited. Three patients were included in this study. The nerve gaps were 13 mm, 15 mm and 100 mm, respectively. We developed a special nerve lengthening device. Starting from postoperative day 1, nerve lengthening was initiated on the proximal and distal ends at a rate of 0.5-1 mm daily (0.25 mm x 2-4 times) using the device. Monthly evaluations post-nerve suturing assessed nerve regeneration, pain, and adverse events. We observed postoperative courses for over 2 years.
resultsThere were two radial nerve injury cases and one median nerve injury case. Functional recovery was observed in cases of shorter nerve defects repaired through nerve lengthening. However, significant functional restoration was not attainable for cases of longer nerve defects or those with prolonged post-injury intervals. Furthermore, in chronic cases, it was confirmed that this method could be used to gradually lengthened and repair severed nerves. There were no reports of pain or lengthening-related troubles during nerve lengthening.
conclusionIt was found that good nerve regeneration can be achieved with short nerve defects. Compared to free nerve grafting, this new treatment is promising as it does not require the sacrifice of healthy nerves from the donor site or leave surgical scars. We demonstrated the potential of nerve lengthening as a new treatment option for nerve defects. This study is registered and published in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (Project No. jRCTs032180098, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/re/reports/detail/17847 ). Registration date: 28/01/2019.
Indexed as
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.