Premium
Helicoid end‐to‐side and oblique attachment technique in repair of the musculocutaneous nerve injury with the phrenic nerve as a donor: An experimental study in rats
Author(s) -
Yan YuHui,
Yan JiGeng,
Matloub Hani S.,
Zhang LinLing,
Hettinger Patrick,
Sanger James,
Jaradeh Safwan S.
Publication year - 2011
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.20840
Subject(s) - medicine , musculocutaneous nerve , phrenic nerve , surgery , diaphragm (acoustics) , epineurial repair , nerve injury , anatomy , median nerve , peripheral nerve , respiratory system , physics , acoustics , loudspeaker
Abstract The purpose of this study was to identify if a modified end‐to‐side repair can achieve equal results of nerve regeneration compared to an end‐to‐end repair using donor phrenic nerves in repair of the musculocutaneous nerve and also pulmonary protection. Eighteen rats were divided into three groups of six each comparing two nerve graft techniques: helicoid end‐to‐side plus distal oblique repair vs. traditional end‐to‐end repair, using a donor phrenic nerve. The saphenous nerve was used as a graft between the phrenic nerve and the musculocutaneous nerve. The third group was used as control; the musculocutaneous nerve was transected without any repair. Three months postoperatively, electrophysiology, tetanic force, moist muscle weight, histology, nerve fiber counting, and chest X‐ray were evaluated. All results have shown that this modified end‐to‐side repair was superior to the end‐to‐end repair. The former did not compromise the diaphragm function, but the latter showed an elevation of the diaphragm. Little recovery was seen in the third group. The conclusion is that this modified end‐to‐side repair can replace the traditional end‐to‐end repair using donor phrenic nerves with better results of nerve regeneration without diaphragm compromise. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc. Microsurgery, 2011.