Advances of Direct Peripheral Nerve Repair Techniques: Do We Already Have Enough Scientific Evidence?

直接周围神经修复技术的进展:我们是否已有足够的科学证据?

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: To systematically review the evidence of direct peripheral nerve repair techniques and to determine any differences in outcomes that would guide rational treatment. Additionally, we compare the results and outcomes of these studies and find future directions for peripheral nerve repair techniques. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Virtual Health Library, and Embase databases to identify articles involving direct peripheral nerve techniques. We analyzed and compared the results and outcomes of these techniques. We also aimed to look for the differences in outcomes that would guide the current and future treatments. RESULTS: We identified 1390 articles, and 19 met our criteria with evidence ranging from level I to level IV. The nerve repair techniques included direct repair, epineural repair, fascicular repair, and group fascicular repair. These nerve techniques are based on the surgeons' personal experience. The results and the outcome of these studies were based on prognostic factors and not on surgical techniques. Few studies compared the surgical techniques and found no significant difference in nerve repair techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Analyzing all direct peripheral nerve techniques and literature of all levels of evidence, our data show no significant difference between different suturing techniques. Currently, there is a lack of scientific evidence on the best direct peripheral nerve repair techniques. Therefore, we need more research to understand the rational treatment methods for peripheral nerve injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。