Literature DB >> 23536007

Posterior interosseus nerve vs. medial cutaneous nerve of the forearm: differences in digital nerve reconstruction.

F Stang1, P Stollwerck, K J Prommersberger, J van Schoonhoven.   

Abstract

Digital nerve defects are common in hand trauma and for primary or secondary nerve reconstruction, the autologous nerve graft remains the gold standard. This study compares the regeneration results and donor side morbidity of either the posterior interosseus nerve (PIN) graft or the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve (MACN) graft. 16 patients (group A, age 43 ± 13 years) with digital nerve defects were treated with a PIN graft and 12 patients (group B, age 40 ± 15 years) received a MACN graft. The average nerve gap was 22 mm in each group. After a follow-up of 15 ± 8 months in group A, S4-sensibility were measured in 9 cases, S3+ in 5 cases and in 1 case S2 and S0. Up to an inconspicuously scar in projection of the fourth extensor-tendon compartment, there was no significant donor side morbidity. In group B, a S4-senibility has been obtained in 4 cases, S3+ in 5 cases, S3, S2 and S0 in each 1 case after a follow-up of 16 ± 11 months. Regarding the donor side morbidity, almost all patients complained about a disturbing scar formation and unpleasant paresthesia at the forearm down to the rascetta. Neuroma-associated pain has been detected in 4 cases. Although there has been no significant difference in terms of nerve regeneration, we recommend the use of the PIN graft for digital nerve reconstruction, since harvesting this nerve is fast and easy and without any donor side morbidity compared to the MACN graft.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23536007     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-013-1731-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  8 in total

1.  Early diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Frank Unglaub; Peter Hahn; Christian K Spies
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  Posterior Interosseous Nerve Graft: Utilizing External Landmarks and Anthropometric Ratios to Predict Available Length for Digital Nerve Reconstruction in a Cadaveric Study.

Authors:  Bradley J Vivace; Swapnil D Kachare; Luke T Meredith; Milind D Kachare; Christina N Kapsalis; Claude Muresan; Joshua H Choo; Morton L Kasdan; Bradon J Wilhelmi
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 0.947

3.  [Percutaneous needle aponeurotomy for Dupuytren's disease].

Authors:  C K Spies; L P Müller; E Skouras; D Bassemir; P Hahn; F Unglaub
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 1.154

4.  Muscle in vein conduits: our experience.

Authors:  Andrea Minini; Almerico Megaro
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2021-04-30

5.  Collagen Type I Conduits for the Regeneration of Nerve Defects.

Authors:  Silvan Klein; Jody Vykoukal; Oliver Felthaus; Thomas Dienstknecht; Lukas Prantl
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 3.623

6.  Lateral Antebrachial Cutaneous Nerve as a Donor Source for Digital Nerve Grafting: A Concept Revisited.

Authors:  Mehmet Bekir Unal; Kemal Gokkus; Evrim Sirin; Eren Cansü
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2017-08-29

Review 7.  Evidence-Based Approach to Timing of Nerve Surgery: A Review.

Authors:  Brendan J MacKay; Cameron T Cox; Ian L Valerio; Jeffrey A Greenberg; Gregory M Buncke; Peter J Evans; Deana M Mercer; Desirae M McKee; Ivica Ducic
Journal:  Ann Plast Surg       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 1.539

8.  Long-term sensibility outcomes of secondary digital nerve reconstruction with sural nerve autografts: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tomasz Dębski; Marcin Złotorowicz; Bartłomiej Henryk Noszczyk
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 2.374

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.