Premium
Acellular nerve allografts in peripheral nerve regeneration: A comparative study
Author(s) -
Moore Amy M.,
Macewan Matthew,
Santosa Katherine B.,
Chenard Kristofer E.,
Ray Wilson Z.,
Hunter Daniel A.,
Mackin Susan E.,
Johnson Philip J.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
muscle and nerve
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.025
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1097-4598
pISSN - 0148-639X
DOI - 10.1002/mus.22033
Subject(s) - isograft , epineurial repair , medicine , regeneration (biology) , peripheral nerve , silicone , sciatic nerve , motor nerve , nerve guidance conduit , nerve injury , surgery , peripheral nerve injury , anatomy , transplantation , chemistry , biology , organic chemistry , microbiology and biotechnology
: Processed nerve allografts offer a promising alternative to nerve autografts in the surgical management of peripheral nerve injuries where short deficits exist. Methods : Three established models of acellular nerve allograft (cold‐preserved, detergent‐processed, and AxoGen‐processed nerve allografts) were compared with nerve isografts and silicone nerve guidance conduits in a 14‐mm rat sciatic nerve defect. Results : All acellular nerve grafts were superior to silicone nerve conduits in support of nerve regeneration. Detergent‐processed allografts were similar to isografts at 6 weeks postoperatively, whereas AxoGen‐processed and cold‐preserved allografts supported significantly fewer regenerating nerve fibers. Measurement of muscle force confirmed that detergent‐processed allografts promoted isograft‐equivalent levels of motor recovery 16 weeks postoperatively. All acellular allografts promoted greater amounts of motor recovery compared with silicone conduits. Conclusion : These findings provide evidence that differential processing for removal of cellular constituents in preparing acellular nerve allografts affects recovery in vivo. Muscle Nerve, 2011