Premium
Comparison of nerve regeneration through different types of neural prostheses
Author(s) -
Gibson Karen L.,
Remson Laura,
Smith Andrea,
Satterlee Nancy,
Strain George M.,
Daniloff Joanne K.
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
microsurgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.031
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1098-2752
pISSN - 0738-1085
DOI - 10.1002/micr.1920120205
Subject(s) - silastic , medicine , regeneration (biology) , surgery , sciatic nerve , implant , connective tissue , anatomy , pathology , biology , microbiology and biotechnology
Rat sciatic nerve regeneration through three synthetic neural prostheses was compared with regeneration through nerve allografts. The synthetic prostheses were either nonpermeable nonabsorbable (Silastic), permeable absorbable (polyglactin mesh), or permeable nonabsorbable (polypropylene mesh). Animals were evaluated at 10, 24, and 90 days. Functional analysis of nerve regeneration was performed by noninvasive methods: electromyography and walking tracks. Nerve tissue was examined with routine histologic and immunofluorescent techniques. A compressive neuropathy developed with the use of the Silastic implant. A neutrophilic inflammatory infiltrate was consistently associated with implantation of the polyglactin mesh. A strong connective tissue response was noted around the polypropylene mesh. Early recovery of nerve function was seen with the Silastic implants, however, overall nerve function was best in the nerve allograft and polypropylene mesh groups. Polyglactin implantation increases the local inflammatory response and should not be used for nerve anastomoses. If Silastic entubulation is used, it should be removed between 24 and 90 days.