Endogenous automatic nerve discharge promotes nerve repair: an optimized animal model.
animal model
electrical treatment
endogenous automatic discharge
intercostal nerve
nerve compression
nerve regeneration
neural regeneration
peripheral nerve regeneration
phrenic nerve
rats
side-to-side nerve anastomosis
Journal
Neural regeneration research
ISSN: 1673-5374
Titre abrégé: Neural Regen Res
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101316351
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
entrez:
12
12
2018
pubmed:
12
12
2018
medline:
12
12
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Exogenous electrical nerve stimulation has been reported to promote nerve regeneration. Our previous study has suggested that endogenous automatic nerve discharge of the phrenic nerve and intercostal nerve has a positive effect on nerve regeneration at 1 month postoperatively, but a negative effect at 2 months postoperatively, which may be caused by scar compression. In this study, we designed four different rat models to avoid the negative effect from scar compression. The control group received musculocutaneous nerve cut and repair. The other three groups were subjected to side-to-side transfer of either the phrenic (phrenic nerve group), intercostal (intercostal nerve group) or thoracodorsal nerves (thoracic dorsal nerve group), with sural nerve autograft distal to the anastomosis site. Musculocutaneous nerve regeneration was assessed by electrophysiology of the musculocutaneous nerve, muscle tension, muscle wet weight, maximum cross-sectional area of biceps, and myelinated fiber numbers of the proximal and distal ends of the anastomosis site of the musculocutaneous nerve and the middle of the nerve graft. At 1 month postoperatively, compound muscle action potential amplitude of the biceps in the phrenic nerve group and the intercostal nerve group was statistically higher than that in the control group. The myelinated nerve fiber numbers in the distal end of the musculocutaneous nerve and nerve graft anastomosis in the phrenic nerve and the intercostal nerve groups were statistically higher than those in the control and thoracic dorsal nerve groups. The neural degeneration rate in the middle of the nerve graft in the thoracic dorsal nerve group was statistically higher than that in the phrenic nerve and the intercostal nerve groups. At 2 and 3 months postoperatively, no significant difference was detected between the groups in all the assessments. These findings confirm that the phrenic nerve and intercostal nerve have a positive effect on nerve regeneration at the early stage of recovery. This study established an optimized animal model in which suturing the nerve graft to the distal site of the musculocutaneous nerve anastomosis prevented the inhibition of recovery from scar compression.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30531014
pii: NeuralRegenRes_2019_14_2_306_244802
doi: 10.4103/1673-5374.244802
pmc: PMC6301173
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
306-312Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None
Références
J Anat. 1999 Jan;194 ( Pt 1):1-14
pubmed: 10227662
J Neurosci. 2000 Apr 1;20(7):2602-8
pubmed: 10729340
Neurosurg Focus. 2004 May 15;16(5):E7
pubmed: 15174827
Behav Brain Res. 2005 Sep 8;163(2):143-58
pubmed: 15979168
Curr Neurovasc Res. 2007 May;4(2):143-51
pubmed: 17504212
Microsurgery. 2008;28(4):265-72
pubmed: 18381659
J Neurosurg. 2008 Jun;108(6):1215-9
pubmed: 18518730
Neurosurg Focus. 2009 Feb;26(2):E3
pubmed: 19228105
Int Rev Neurobiol. 2009;87:251-68
pubmed: 19682641
Int Rev Neurobiol. 2009;87:269-79
pubmed: 19682642
Int Rev Neurobiol. 2009;87:281-94
pubmed: 19682643
Microsurgery. 2010 May;30(4):314-20
pubmed: 20058301
Neurosurgery. 2010 Jul;67(1):136-43; discussion 143
pubmed: 20559101
Neurosurgery. 2011 Jun;68(6):1648-53; discussion 1653
pubmed: 21358355
Ann Plast Surg. 2011 Apr;66(4):370-6
pubmed: 21372674
Acta Biomater. 2012 Feb;8(2):511-8
pubmed: 22019759
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2012 Sep;114(7):1035-8
pubmed: 22386899
Open Orthop J. 2012;6:60-8
pubmed: 22431951
J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2013 Mar;38(3):242-7
pubmed: 22618552
Brain Res. 2012 Aug 30;1471:93-101
pubmed: 22771398
J Neurosurg. 2013 Apr;118(4):725-9
pubmed: 23373808
Ann Plast Surg. 2014 Oct;73(4):405-11
pubmed: 24317246
Muscle Nerve. 2014 Jul;50(1):67-72
pubmed: 24639264
Eplasty. 2014 Apr 09;14:e17
pubmed: 24904711
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015 Aug;29(7):690-700
pubmed: 25505222
J Reconstr Microsurg. 2015 Mar;31(3):210-6
pubmed: 25629206
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 17;10(2):e0116711
pubmed: 25689049
Microsurgery. 1989;10(4):287-9
pubmed: 2593799
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2015 Apr;3(2):82-7
pubmed: 26110172
Eur J Neurosci. 2016 Feb;43(3):336-50
pubmed: 26121368
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016 May;69(5):623-8
pubmed: 26702947
Neurotherapeutics. 2016 Apr;13(2):295-310
pubmed: 26754579
Eur J Transl Myol. 2015 Aug 24;25(4):243-8
pubmed: 26913163
Einstein (Sao Paulo). 2017 Jan-Mar;15(1):71-76
pubmed: 28444093
Indian J Plast Surg. 2017 Jan-Apr;50(1):5-15
pubmed: 28615804
Exp Ther Med. 2017 Jul;14(1):507-514
pubmed: 28672960
Sci Rep. 2017 Oct 3;7(1):12605
pubmed: 28974767
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2017 Oct;5(4):231-239
pubmed: 29177169
Neural Regen Res. 2018 May;13(5):862-868
pubmed: 29863017
Nihon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi. 1983 Nov;57(11):1799-807
pubmed: 6676395
Pharmacopsychiatry. 1994 Jul;27 Suppl 1:15-7
pubmed: 7984691
J Hand Surg Br. 1998 Aug;23(4):433-7
pubmed: 9726539