Premium
To reverse or not to reverse? A systematic review of autograft polarity on functional outcomes following peripheral nerve repair surgery
Author(s) -
Roberts S. E.,
Thibaudeau S.,
Burrell J. C.,
Zager E. L.,
Cullen D. K.,
Levin L. S.
Publication year - 2017
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.30133
Subject(s) - medicine , peripheral nerve , nerve repair , regeneration (biology) , surgery , polarity (international relations) , peripheral , anatomy , biology , microbiology and biotechnology , genetics , cell
Background The literature describing the best clinical practice for proximal–distal autograft orientation, otherwise known as nerve graft polarity, is inconsistent. With existing disparities in the peripheral nerve literature, the clinical question remains whether reversing nerve autograft polarity bears an advantage for nerve regeneration. Methods A comprehensive review of the literature using Embase and PubMed databases (1940–June 2015) was performed to retrieve all original articles on the effects of nerve autograft polarity on nerve regeneration and functional recovery following primary repair of peripheral nerve defects. Results The initial database search yielded 318 titles. Duplicate exclusion, title review and full text review yielded six articles which directly compared nerve autograft polarity. Histological, morphometric, electrophysiological, and behavioral outcomes were reviewed. All retained articles were animal studies, of which none demonstrated significant differences in outcomes between the normal and reversed polarity groups. A reversed graft may ensure that regenerating nerve fibers are not lost at branching points, however this may not translate into improved function. Conclusion There is insufficient data to suggest that nerve autograft polarity has an impact on nerve regeneration and functional outcomes.