Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41425146›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Biomechanical responses of peripheral nerves in human, pig and rat: a comparative study.

Anita Singh, Scott Kozin, Sriram Balasubramanian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Anita SinghBioengineering Department, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Scott KozinShriners Children's, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Sriram BalasubramanianSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Science and Health Systems, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peripheral nerve injury primarily results from trauma and understanding their mechanical responses is critical to both, the prevention, and the management of sustained injuries. This study aimed to determine and compare the biomechanical responses of sural nerve in human infants, and age-equivalent pig and rat animal models. Biomechanical failure tensile testing was performed on freshly harvested sural nerves. Obtained failure load, and calculated failure stress, corresponding strain, and Young's Modulus (E) were compared among various species. Histological analysis was also performed on tested nerves to determine the extent of vascular and fiber damage. No significant differences in the failure properties of the age-equivalent human and pig sural nerves were observed. However, the failure load and E values were significantly higher in human and pig nerves when compared to rat nerves. Failure stress was significantly higher in humans than in rat nerves. Histological analysis reported non-significant species-specific differences. In summary, rat sural nerves reported significantly weaker biomechanical properties while the observed structural damage was similar in the three studied species. Obtained data offers an understanding of species-specific differences in the nerve biomechanical properties and can guide translational research that aims to advance the area of peripheral nerve injury and repair.

Indexed as

biomechanicshumaninjuryperipheral nervepigrattension

Identifiers

PMID41425146
PMCPMC12711755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.