ArticleMuscle & nerve2026
Conservative Safety Assessment of a Nitinol Microhook Coaptation Device on Intact Nerve.
Article in Muscle & nerve, 2026. 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.
- Conservative Safety Assessment of a Nitinol Microhook Coaptation Device on Intact Nerve.Muscle & nerve · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
aimsNerve Tape is a novel nerve coaptation device that eliminates the technical challenges of microsuturing. The device incorporates tissue-engaging Nitinol microhooks within a flexible backing of decellularized porcine small intestine submucosa (SIS). Preclinical nerve injury models have demonstrated device safety and effective promotion of regeneration and recovery. Here, we further assess the impact of the device's components on nerve tissue and function, using a highly conservative model in which the device is applied to intact nerves.
methodsNerve Tape, sutures, or SIS were applied to rabbit tibial nerves in a manner simulating transection repairs but leaving the nerves intact. After three months, "repaired" nerves and target gastrocnemius muscles along with contralateral control nerves and muscles were evaluated for perineural scarring, inflammation, and function utilizing gross inspection, morphology measurements, electrophysiology, and histology.
resultsAnalysis of endpoint data, including muscle mass/girth, nerve compound action potential (NCAP) amplitude, conduction velocity, axon counts, and g-ratio revealed no significant differences between experimental or control groups (distal axon count/g-ratio: Nerve Tape 6546 ± 2300, 0.647 ± 0.04; Suture 7979 ± 666, 0.664 ± 0.033; SIS 7537 ± 2117, 0.689 ± 0.02; control 6158 ± 1958, 0.631 ± 0.02). Gross adhesion thickness at the treatment site was higher in the Suture group versus the Nerve Tape group. Granulomas and neovascularization were most pronounced in the Suture group. Macrophage/lymphocyte/plasma cell presence was associated with SIS material. No additional tissue response was observed in response to Nitinol components. DISCUSSION: Nerve Tape's SIS and Nitinol microhook design maintained the health of an intact nerve with sequelae comparable to sutures or SIS without microhooks.
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.