| Literature DB >> 32616978 |
Igor Rabelo de Sales Andrade1, Luis Renato Nakachima1, Marcela Fernandes1, Carlos Henrique Fernandes1, João Baptista Gomes Dos Santos1, Sandra Gomes Valente1.
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the effects of swimming on nerve regeneration after sciatic nerve injury in Wistar rats. Methods A total of 30 Wistar rats was divided into 3 groups: Sham + Nat group animals that were not submitted to graft surgery and were submitted to swimming ( n = 10); Graft group: animals submitted to autologous sciatic nerve graft ( n = 10); and Graft + Nat group: animals submitted to autologous sciatic nerve graft surgery and to swimming ( n = 10). The results were analyzed on the software (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Results In the first evaluation, all sciatic functional index (SFI) values were similar ( p = 0.609). Thirty days after the surgical procedure, we observed differences between all the comparisons: Sham + Nat (-34.64 ± 13.89) versus Graft (-145.9 ± 26.06); Sham + Nat versus Graft + Nat (-89.40 ± 7.501); Graft (-145.9 ± 26.06) versus Graft + Nat (-89.40 ± 7.501). In the measurements (60 and 90 days), there was no statistical difference between the Graft and Graft + Nat groups, with significantly lower values in relation to the control group ( p < 0.001). The number of motor neurons presented differences in the comparisons between the Sham + Nat and Graft groups (647.1 ± 16.42 versus 563.4 ± 8.07; p < 0.05), and between the Sham + Nat and Graft + Nat groups (647.1 ± 16.42 versus 558.8 ± 14.79; p < 0.05). There was no difference between the Graft and Graft + Nat groups. Conclusion Animals submitted to the swimming protocol after the sciatic nerve grafting procedure did not present differences in the SFI values and motor neuron numbers when compared to the control group. Therefore, this type of protocol is not efficient for the rehabilitation of peripheral nerve lesions that require grafting. Therefore, further studies are needed.Entities:
Keywords: nervous Regeneration; peripheral nerve injuries; sciatic nerve; swimming
Year: 2020 PMID: 32616978 PMCID: PMC7316549 DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692711
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) ISSN: 0102-3616
Sciatic functional index analysis between groups Sham + Swimming, Graft, and Graft + Swimming at times of 0, 30, 60, and 90 days
| Time | Group | Average | SD | Median | Minimum | Maximum |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| −17.78 | 17.27 | −24.27 | −25.74 | 24.82 | 8 | 0.6099 |
|
| −20.64 | 9.679 | −18.82 | −35.16 | −8.360 | 9 | ||
|
| −14.18 | 13.46 | −17.83 | −25.57 | −25.57 | 9 | ||
|
|
| −34.64 | 13.89 | −32.41 | −50.20 | −13.79 | 7 |
|
|
| −145.9 | 26.06 | −143.3 | −190.2 | −100.4 | 10 | ||
|
| −89.40 | 7.501 | −89.03 | −100.2 | −74.30 | 9 | ||
|
|
| −26.97 | 13.28 | −20.28 | −50.12 | −13.32 | 7 |
|
|
| −77.52 | 11.34 | −80.24 | −91.15 | −58.36 | 10 | ||
|
| −84.69 | 21.65 | −91.44 | −102.6 | −27.64 | 10 | ||
|
|
| −19.11 | 11.33 | −21.26 | −36.82 | −2.870 | 8 |
|
|
| −72.14 | 19.50 | −73.37 | −107.5 | −41.16 | 10 | ||
|
| −84,27 | 5,782 | −83,74 | −92,28 | −75,10 | 8 |
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
Note: n = sample number. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with correction by the Bonferroni post-test. Statistically significant differences were considered with p-values ≤0.05. *; differences between all comparisons (Sham + Swimming versus Graft, Sham + Swimming versus Graft + Swimming, Graft versus Graft + Swimming); # ; differences between groups: Sham + Swimming versus Graft, Sham + Swimming versus Graft + Swimming.
Fig. 1Sciatic functional index analysis between Sham + Swimming, Graft, and Graft + Swimming groups at 0, 30, 60, and 90 days.
Fig. 2Motoneuron count values after correction by the Abercrombie factor. Thirty animals were divided into the following groups: Sham + Swimming ( n = 10), Graft ( n = 10) and Graft + Swimming ( n = 10) at 0, 30, 60, and 90 days. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) with correction by the Bonferroni post-test. * Differences were found between comparisons (Sham + Swimming versus Graft, Sham + Swimming versus Graft + Swimming); differences with p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Análise do índice funcional do ciático entre os grupos Sham + Natação, Enxerto e Enxerto + Natação nos tempos de 0, 30, 60 e 90 dias
| Tempo | Grupo | Média | DP | Mediana | Mínimo | Máximo |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| −17,78 | 17,27 | −24,27 | −25,74 | 24,82 | 8 | 0,6099 |
|
| −20,64 | 9,679 | −18,82 | −35,16 | −8,360 | 9 | ||
|
| −14,18 | 13,46 | −17,83 | −25,57 | −25,57 | 9 | ||
|
|
| −34,64 | 13,89 | −32,41 | −50,20 | −13,79 | 7 |
|
|
| −145,9 | 26,06 | −143,3 | −190,2 | −100,4 | 10 | ||
|
| −89,40 | 7,501 | −89,03 | −100,2 | −74,30 | 9 | ||
|
|
| −26,97 | 13,28 | −20,28 | −50,12 | −13,32 | 7 |
|
|
| −77,52 | 11,34 | −80,24 | −91,15 | −58,36 | 10 | ||
|
| −84,69 | 21,65 | −91,44 | −102,6 | −27,64 | 10 | ||
|
|
| −19,11 | 11,33 | −21,26 | −36,82 | −2,870 | 8 |
|
|
| −72,14 | 19,50 | −73,37 | −107,5 | −41,16 | 10 | ||
|
| −84,27 | 5,782 | −83,74 | −92,28 | −75,10 | 8 |
Abreviação: DP, desvio padrão.
Nota: n = número amostral. Teste de análise da variância (ANOVA) com correção pelo pós-teste de Bonferroni. Foram consideradas diferenças estatisticamente significativas valores–p ≤ 0,05. *; diferenças entre todas as comparações (Sham + Natação versus Enxerto, Sham + Natação versus Enxerto + Natação, Enxerto versus Enxerto + Natação); # ; diferenças entre os grupos: Sham + Natação versus Enxerto, Sham + Natação versus Enxerto + Natação.
Fig. 1Análise do índice funcional do ciático entre os grupos Sham + Natação, Enxerto e Enxerto + Natação nos tempos de 0, 30, 60 e 90 dias.
Fig. 2Valores da contagem de motoneurônios após correção pelo fator Abercrombie. Foram avaliados 30 animais divididos nos seguintes grupos: Sham + Natação ( n = 10), Enxerto ( n = 10), e Enxerto + Natação ( n = 10), nos tempos de 0, 30, 60 e 90 dias. Teste de análise da variância (ANOVA) com correção pelo pós-teste de Bonferroni. * Foram encontradas diferenças entre as comparações (Sham + Natação versus Enxerto, Sham + Natação versus Enxerto + Natação), foram consideradas diferenças estatisticamente significativas valores-p ≤ 0,05.