Caroline A Banks1, Christopher Knox1, Daniel A Hunter2, Susan E Mackinnon3, Marc H Hohman1, Tessa A Hadlock4. 1. Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery Harvard Medical School/Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Plastic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 3. Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri. 4. Department of Otolaryngology, Facial Nerve Center, Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rodent model is commonly used to study facial nerve injury. Because of the exceptional regenerative capacity of the rodent facial nerve, it is essential to consider the timing when studying facial nerve regeneration and functional recovery. Short-term functional recovery data following transection and repair of the facial nerve has been documented by our laboratory. However, because of the limitations of the head fixation device, there is a lack of long-term data following facial nerve injury. The objective of this study was to elucidate the long-term time course and functional deficit following facial nerve transection and repair in a rodent model. METHODS: Adult rats were divided into group 1 (controls) and group 2 (experimental). Group 1 animals underwent head fixation, followed by a facial nerve injury, and functional testing was performed from day 7 to day 70. Group 2 animals underwent facial nerve injury, followed by delayed head fixation, and then underwent functional testing from months 6 to 8. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the average whisking amplitudes in group 1 and group 2 animals. CONCLUSION: Functional whisking recovery 6 months after facial nerve injury is comparable to recovery within 1 to 4 months of transection and repair, thus the ideal window for evaluating facial nerve recovery falls within the 4 months after injury. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.
BACKGROUND: The rodent model is commonly used to study facial nerve injury. Because of the exceptional regenerative capacity of the rodent facial nerve, it is essential to consider the timing when studying facial nerve regeneration and functional recovery. Short-term functional recovery data following transection and repair of the facial nerve has been documented by our laboratory. However, because of the limitations of the head fixation device, there is a lack of long-term data following facial nerve injury. The objective of this study was to elucidate the long-term time course and functional deficit following facial nerve transection and repair in a rodent model. METHODS: Adult rats were divided into group 1 (controls) and group 2 (experimental). Group 1 animals underwent head fixation, followed by a facial nerve injury, and functional testing was performed from day 7 to day 70. Group 2 animals underwent facial nerve injury, followed by delayed head fixation, and then underwent functional testing from months 6 to 8. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the average whisking amplitudes in group 1 and group 2 animals. CONCLUSION: Functional whisking recovery 6 months after facial nerve injury is comparable to recovery within 1 to 4 months of transection and repair, thus the ideal window for evaluating facial nerve recovery falls within the 4 months after injury. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Authors: Thomas M Brushart; Paul N Hoffman; Richard M Royall; Beth B Murinson; Christian Witzel; Tessa Gordon Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Robin W Lindsay; James T Heaton; Colin Edwards; Christopher Smitson; Kalpesh Vakharia; Tessa A Hadlock Journal: Arch Facial Plast Surg Date: 2010 May-Jun
Authors: Ida K Fox; Michael J Brenner; Philip J Johnson; Daniel A Hunter; Susan E Mackinnon Journal: Microsurgery Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 2.425
Authors: Ryan C Burgette; Brent J Benscoter; Gina N Monaco; Matthew L Kircher; Avinash V Mantravadi; Sam J Marzo; Kathy J Jones; Eileen M Foecking Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Lisa Ishii; Andres Godoy; Carlos O Encarnacion; Patrick J Byrne; Kofi D O Boahene; Masaru Ishii Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2012-01-17 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Tessa A Hadlock; Jeffrey Kowaleski; David Lo; Susan E Mackinnon; James T Heaton Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Jacqueline J Greene; Mark T McClendon; Nicholas Stephanopoulos; Zaida Álvarez; Samuel I Stupp; Claus-Peter Richter Journal: J Tissue Eng Regen Med Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 3.963
Authors: Fuat Baris Bengur; Conrad Stoy; Mary A Binko; Wayne Vincent Nerone; Caroline Nadia Fedor; Mario G Solari; Kacey G Marra Journal: Tissue Eng Part B Rev Date: 2021-04-13 Impact factor: 7.376