ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2026
Electroacupuncture following microsurgical neurorrhaphy: functional and histological outcomes in a rat model.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated electroacupuncture (EA) as adjunctive therapy after peripheral nerve repair in a rat model.
methodsMale Wistar rats underwent right sciatic nerve transection followed by neurorrhaphy and were randomized into EA or control groups. EA was performed twice weekly for 12 weeks. Sensory and motor recovery were assessed by nociceptive, mechanical, thermal, and sciatic functional index tests. Histological analyses evaluated Schwann cell and vascular densities, and gastrocnemius muscle weight was measured at euthanasia.
resultsSensory recovery was significantly greater in the EA group, with higher pain (3 [3-3.75] versus 2 [1-2], p = 0.02), pressure (2.5 [1.25-3] versus 0 [0-1], p = 0.009), and thermal sensitivity scores (2 [2-2.75] versus 0 [0-0], p = 0.02). Motor recovery and vascular density did not differ between groups. Distal Schwann cell density was significantly higher in the EA group (73.5 [67.4-74.1] versus 34.7 [34.5-38.4], p = 0.014). Gastrocnemius muscle weight was reduced in operated limbs in both groups, without intergroup differences.
conclusionEA improved sensory recovery and increased distal Schwann cell density, supporting its potential as an adjunctive therapy after peripheral nerve repair.
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.