ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Does reconstructing superficial branch of radial nerve defect with a split homolateral graft prevent painful neuromas?
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the efficiency of reconstructing the superficial branch of the radial nerve using a split homolateral graft to prevent painful neuromas.
methodsFrom January 2019 to October 2022, 32 patients (32 forearms) with traumatic defects of the superficial branch of the radial nerve were treated using a split homolateral graft. The assessments included pain, two-point discrimination, and patient satisfaction. For comparison, another 35 patients (35 forearms) who did not undergo nerve repair were reviewed.
resultsThe mean age of the nerve repair group was 36 years (range, 18-52 years). The mean defect length was 42 ± 18 mm. The mean follow-up period was 28.5 ± 4.7 months. The mean age of the non-nerve repair group was 35 years (range, 19-54 years). The mean defect length was 45 ± 22 mm. The mean follow-up period was 27.7 ± 5.8 months. There were no significant differences in patient age (P > 0.05), defect length (P > 0.05), and follow-up period (P > 0.05). At the final follow-up, the pain scales at the injury site for the two groups were 0 ± 1 cm vs 5 ± 4 cm (P < 0.05) based on the 10-cm visual analog scale. Sensation on the dorsum of the thumb were 4.8 ± 1.5 mm for the injured hand, 4.2 ± 1.4 mm for the opposite hand, and 9.3 ± 1.6 for the non-nerve repair hand (P < 0.05). Sensation on the first web were 5.2 ± 1.5 mm for the injured hand, 4.7 ± 1.2 mm for the opposite hand, and 8.9 ± 2.6 mm for the non-verve repair hand, (P < 0.05). Based on the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction, patient satisfaction of the nerve repair group and non-nerve repair group were 22.3 ± 3.5 and 18.6 ± 4.7, respectively (P < 0.05).
conclusionsTraumatic defects of the superficial branch of the radial nerve can be reconstructed using a split homolateral graft. Most sensations can be restored without causing morbidity. The surgery may reduce the incidence of painful neuroma formation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level IVa.
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.