| Literature DB >> 29330413 |
Xiaozhong Zhu1, Haifeng Wei2, Hongyi Zhu3.
Abstract
The repair of injured peripheral nerve is still challenging for surgeons. The end-to-end and tension-free neurorrhaphy is the current gold standard for reconstruction after complete nerve transection without significant defect. The main objective of this study neurorrhaphy in digit replantation affects the sensory recovery and neuropathic pain in replanted digit. Total 101 patients who received replantation of single completely amputated digit were included for analysis in this study. In group I (n = 49), the digital nerves were repaired with end-to-end and tension-free neurorrhaphy and then wrapped into a tendon-derived collagen nerve conduit. In group II (n = 52), the digital nerves were repaired with end-to-end and tension-free neurorrhaphy only. The static two-point discrimination (s2PD) was performed to evaluate sensory recovery. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores of pain at rest and with exertion were measured respectively. The s2PD tests at three and six months after surgery did not show any significant difference between the two groups. The VAS scores at rest and with exertion of group I were significantly reduced compared with those of group II at three and six months after surgery. Thus, we concluded that nerve wrap into a collagen conduit after end-to-end and tension-free neurorrhaphy could attenuate neuropathic pain after digit replantation but have no benefit for sensory recovery.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29330413 PMCID: PMC5766600 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-19134-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Demographic characteristics of 101 study participants by treatment group.
| Group I (n = 49) | Group II (n = 52) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 40.1 ± 10.8 | 38.7 ± 9.7 | 0.19 |
| Sex | |||
| Male | 43 (88) | 47 (90) | 0.67 |
| Female | 6 (12) | 5 (10) | |
| Injury mechanism | |||
| Blade | 12 (24) | 10 (19) | 0.93 |
| Saw | 20 (41) | 22 (42) | |
| Crush | 10 (20) | 12 (23) | |
| Avulsion | 7 (15) | 8 (16) | |
| Tamai level | |||
| III | 23 (47) | 22 (42) | 0.84 |
| IV | 21 (43) | 23 (44) | |
| V | 5 (10) | 7 (14) | |
| Smoking | |||
| Yes | 20 (41) | 26 (50) | 0.35 |
| No | 29 (59) | 26 (50) | |
Group I: Nerve wrap; group II: control.
Figures are numbers (percentage).
Figure 1The nerves were anastomosed with epineurial fashion.
Figure 2The repaired nerve was wrapped with the collagen conduit.
The s2PD of 101 study participants by treatment group.
| Group I (n = 49) | Group II (n = 52) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Three months postoperatively | |||
| Excellent | 5 (10) | 6 (12) | 0.79 |
| Good | 25 (51) | 23 (44) | |
| Poor | 19 (39) | 23 (44) | |
| Six months postoperatively | |||
| Excellent | 20 (41) | 23 (44) | 0.94 |
| Good | 25 (51) | 25 (48) | |
| Poor | 4 (8) | 4 (8) | |
Group I: Nerve wrap; group II: control.
The VAS scores (mm, out of 100 mm) of 101 study participants by treatment group.
| Group I (n = 49) | Group II (n = 52) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Three months postoperatively | |||
| VAS score at rest | 10.9 ± 8.3 | 14.7 ± 9.6 | 0.036 |
| VAS score with exertion | 28.9 ± 16.8 | 37.0 ± 18.7 | 0.025 |
| Tinel’s sign (+) | 29 | 42 | 0.029 |
| Six months postoperatively | |||
| VAS score at rest | 7.7 ± 5.9 | 10.6 ± 6.9 | 0.027 |
| VAS score with exertion | 14.7 ± 14.9 | 23.7 ± 16.4 | 0.005 |
| Tinel’s sign (+) | 9 | 19 | 0.048 |
Group I: Nerve wrap; group II: control.