ReviewBrain & spine2026
Comparative surgical outcomes in ballistic peripheral nerve injuries: A single-surgeon experience and mechanism-based classification of gunshot versus shrapnel trauma.
Review in Brain & spine, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ballistic peripheral nerve injuries are increasingly encountered in both military and civilian practice. Injuries caused by high-velocity bullets and by shrapnel differ significantly in mechanism, pathological characteristics, and clinical behavior. Objective: To compare bullet-related and shrapnel-related peripheral nerve injuries with respect to injury mechanisms, intraneural foreign bodies, neuropathic pain, motor deficit severity, surgical strategy, timing of intervention, and outcomes, and to define optimal microsurgical management principles. Methods: A structured review was conducted on 107 patients, including cases previously published by Rochkind et al. (2000, 2002, 2007, 2014) and additional recent clinical experience. Analysis focused on injury morphology, indications for neurolysis versus nerve grafting, timing of surgery, and prognostic factors. Only limb peripheral nerve injuries were included; brachial plexus injuries were excluded. Results: Shrapnel injuries demonstrated higher rates of intraneural foreign bodies (≈55%) and severe neuropathic pain (≈95%) than bullet injuries (≈4-5% and ≈73%). Severe motor deficits (MRC <3) were more common in bullet injuries (≈90%) than in shrapnel injuries (≈62%). Pain improvement was greater after bullet injuries, whereas nerve grafting provided superior pain relief in shrapnel injuries. Early surgery (<3 months) significantly improved pain outcomes in shrapnel injuries. Conclusions: Bullet injuries are typically focal and static, whereas shrapnel injuries are diffuse and progressive. Early microsurgical exploration with foreign-body removal and selective nerve grafting is recommended for shrapnel injuries, while bullet injuries benefit from continuity-based reconstruction strategies.
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.