...
首页> 外文期刊>Microsurgery. >Evaluation of sensory recovery after reconstruction of digital nerves of the hand using muscle-in-vein conduits in comparison to nerve suture or nerve autografting
【24h】

Evaluation of sensory recovery after reconstruction of digital nerves of the hand using muscle-in-vein conduits in comparison to nerve suture or nerve autografting

机译:与神经缝线或神经自体移植相比,使用脉管内肌肉导管重建手的手指神经后的感觉恢复评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: Muscle-in-vein conduits are a good alternative solution to nerve autografts for bridging peripheral nerve defects since enough graft material is available and no loss of sensation at the harvesting area is expected. The purpose of this study was to compare regeneration results after digital nerve reconstruction with muscle-in-vein conduits, nerve autografts, or direct suture. Patients and Methods: 46 patients with 53 digital nerve injuries of the hand subjected to direct suture (n = 22) or reconstruction of 1-6cm long defects with either nerve autografts (n = 14) or muscle-in-vein conduits (n = 17) between 2008 and 2012, were examined using the two-point discrimination and Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments. Results: The follow-up examinations took place 12 to 58 months after surgery. A median reduction of sensibility of 2 Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments compared with intact digits was observed after direct suture (DS) and of 2.5 and 2 Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments after reconstruction with autologous nerve grafts (ANG) and muscle-in-vein conduits (MVC), respectively. No statistically significant differences between all three groups could be found with a significance level set by a P 0.006 (PDS-ANG= 0.24, PDS-MVC= 0.03, PANG-MVC5 0.52). After harvesting a nerve graft, reduction of sensibility at the donor site occurred in 10 of 14 cases but only in one case after harvesting a muscle-in-vein conduit. Conclusions: Muscle-in-vein conduits may be a good alternative solution to autografts for the reconstruction of digital nerves, since no significant differences could be demonstrated between the two methods.
机译:背景:脉管肌肉导管是神经自体移植桥接周围神经缺损的一种很好的替代解决方案,因为有足够的移植材料,并且在收获区域不会造成感觉损失。这项研究的目的是比较肌肉内静脉导管,神经自体移植或直接缝合重建指神经后的再生结果。患者和方法:46例手部数字神经损伤53例,直接缝合(n = 22)或用神经自体移植(n = 14)或静脉内肌肉导管(n = 17)在2008年至2012年之间,使用两点鉴别法和Semmes-Weinstein单丝进行了检验。结果:术后12至58个月进行了随访检查。在直接缝合(DS)后,观察到2个Semmes-Weinstein单丝的敏感性中位数降低,而用自体神经移植物(ANG)和脉管内肌肉重建(MVC)重建后的敏感性分别降低了2.5和2个Semmes-Weinstein单丝), 分别。通过P <0.006设置的显着性水平(PDS-ANG = 0.24,PDS-MVC = 0.03,PANG-MVC5 0.52),在三组之间均未发现统计学上的显着差异。收集神经移植物后,在14例中的10例中,供体部位的敏感性降低了,但仅在收获了静脉内肌肉导管后才发生1例。结论:静脉肌导管可能是自体移植重建指状神经的一个很好的替代解决方案,因为两种方法之间没有明显的差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号