Abstract

The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity. Therefore, feasible alternatives to autologous nerve grafts are sought. Muscle-in-vein conduits have been proposed as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts almost three decades ago, given the abundance of both tissues throughout the body. Based on the anti-inflammatory effects of veins and the proregenerative environment established by muscle tissue, this approach has been studied in various preclinical and some clinical trials. There is still no comprehensive systematic summary to conclude efficacy and feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects. Given this lack of a conclusive summary, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the potential of muscle-in-vein conduits. This work’s main findings are profound discrepancies regarding the results following nerve repair by means of muscle-in-vein conduits in a preclinical or clinical setting. We identified differences in study methodology, inter-species neurobiology and the limited number of clinical studies to be the main reasons for the still inconclusive results. In conclusion, we advise for large animal studies to elucidate the feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for repair of segmental defects of critical size in mixed nerves.

Highlights

  • The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity

  • Our meta-analysis revealed marked differences regarding the outcome of nerve repair by means of autologous nerve grafts (ANGs) or muscle-invein conduit (MVC) between preclinical and clinical studies

  • Due to strong heterogeneity in study methodology, only a limited number of studies’ data (n = 6) could be included in our quantitative synthesis, 10 studies were eligible for inclusion in our qualitative synthesis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity. Muscle-in-vein conduits have been proposed as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts almost three decades ago, given the abundance of both tissues throughout the body. There is still no comprehensive systematic summary to conclude efficacy and feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects. Given this lack of a conclusive summary, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the potential of muscle-in-vein conduits. In cases of segmental nerve damage in which tension-free neurorrhaphy is impossible, autologous nerve grafts (ANGs) are considered the gold-standard t­ reatment[4] Their use is restricted due to limited availability throughout the body and specific requirements regarding length, diameter, and vascularization. Voluntary motor function Walking Track Analysis Grasping Strength Electrophysiology: Nerve conduction velocity (NCV) Compound Muscle Action Potential (CMAP) Histology Axon count, axon density, axon diameter, fiber diameter, thickness of the myelin sheath, Study design

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call