Literature DB >> 3275927

A review of experimental methods measuring peripheral nerve regeneration in animals.

G K Frykman1, P J McMillan, S Yegge.   

Abstract

We have reviewed the morphologic, electrophysiologic, biochemical, and functional methods of evaluating PN regeneration in animal models. There are a large number of anatomic techniques that can provide clear insights into the processes of peripheral nerve regeneration. Since many of these are costly in terms of labor, careful selection of the technique appropriate for the question asked is important. Two of the more important questions are: 1) What are the neurotrophic factors produced by the distal segment that attract the growing axon tip? and 2) What are the components of the basal lamina that facilitate the directed growth of the axons? To answer these questions, whole mount preparations provide the means to economically evaluate the result of experimental manipulation of the environment. Automated nerve fiber counts will be increasingly used to help interpret electrophysiologic studies. Quantitative as well as descriptive ultrastructural analyses will continue to provide valuable data that will be needed in the interpretation of biochemical and histochemical studies. Immunohistochemical probes are sure to become more important as the range of their specificities broadens. With the diversity of anatomic methods available and their capacity to help us visualize the processes occurring during nerve regeneration they will remain a key tool in these studies. Electrophysiologic methods that integrate the CAP and correlate it with the number of functioning NF are most useful. Functional methods are beginning to become more objective and quantitative. The most precise measurements are muscle weight and the isometric response of muscle to tetanic contraction. Sensory function has now been measured objectively by Horch. Single methods of measuring PN regeneration give only limited data, but by combining methods a better understanding of PN regeneration is possible. While understanding the limitations of each method and technique, multi-parameter animal models may provide data most helpful clinically. However, because of great species variability in the reparative response, caution must be given not to extrapolate too much from animal studies. We urge investigators to use the most objective methods available to measure nerve regeneration. Recognizing these limitations, however, animal studies will continue to provide significant insights into PN regeneration and should point the way to improved clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3275927

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am        ISSN: 0030-5898            Impact factor:   2.472


  10 in total

1.  Effects of neurotoxic and neuroprotective agents on peripheral nerve regeneration assayed by time-lapse imaging in vivo.

Authors:  Y Albert Pan; Thomas Misgeld; Jeff W Lichtman; Joshua R Sanes
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2003-12-10       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  Neuroprotective Effect of Natural Products on Peripheral Nerve Degeneration: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Heitor G Araújo-Filho; Lucindo J Quintans-Júnior; André S Barreto; Jackson R G S Almeida; Rosana S S Barreto; Jullyana S S Quintans
Journal:  Neurochem Res       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 3.996

3.  Live imaging of neural structure and function by fibred fluorescence microscopy.

Authors:  Pierre Vincent; Uwe Maskos; Igor Charvet; Laurence Bourgeais; Luc Stoppini; Nathalie Leresche; Jean-Pierre Changeux; Régis Lambert; Paolo Meda; Danièle Paupardin-Tritsch
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2006-09-29       Impact factor: 8.807

4.  The leukocyte common antigen-related protein tyrosine phosphatase receptor regulates regenerative neurite outgrowth in vivo.

Authors:  Y Xie; T T Yeo; C Zhang; T Yang; M A Tisi; S M Massa; F M Longo
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2001-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Electromyographic evaluation of experimental nerve grafts suggests better recovery with microscope assistance.

Authors:  M F Stancić; V Mićović; D Bobinac; G Starcević; A Fuzinac; Z Tomljanović
Journal:  Pflugers Arch       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.657

6.  A comparison of the passage of regenerating axons through old degenerated nerve autografts and fresh nerve autografts in rats.

Authors:  H K Lee; M S Chung; H J Kim
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Insulin-like growth factor II stimulates motor nerve regeneration.

Authors:  S L Near; L R Whalen; J A Miller; D N Ishii
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1992-12-15       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Hypoglossal-facial nerve reconstruction using a Y-tube-conduit reduces aberrant synkinetic movements of the orbicularis oculi and vibrissal muscles in rats.

Authors:  Yasemin Kaya; Umut Ozsoy; Murat Turhan; Doychin N Angelov; Levent Sarikcioglu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Nerve recovery from treatment with a vascularized nerve graft compared to an autologous non-vascularized nerve graft in animal models: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Berend O Broeren; Liron S Duraku; Caroline A Hundepool; Erik T Walbeehm; J Michiel Zuidam; Carlijn R Hooijmans; Tim De Jong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Application of topical pharmacological agents at the site of peripheral nerve injury and methods used for evaluating the success of the regenerative process.

Authors:  Agon Y Mekaj; Arsim A Morina; Cen I Bytyqi; Ymer H Mekaj; Shkelzen B Duci
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2014-10-11       Impact factor: 2.359

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.