A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction
Abstract The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity. Therefore, feasible alternatives to autologous nerve grafts are sought. Muscle-in-vein conduits have been propo...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Nature Portfolio
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/fa1db15e4ba74fe9b07c163e79a1025b |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:fa1db15e4ba74fe9b07c163e79a1025b |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:fa1db15e4ba74fe9b07c163e79a1025b2021-12-02T17:51:06ZA systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction10.1038/s41598-021-90956-32045-2322https://doaj.org/article/fa1db15e4ba74fe9b07c163e79a1025b2021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-90956-3https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity. Therefore, feasible alternatives to autologous nerve grafts are sought. Muscle-in-vein conduits have been proposed as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts almost three decades ago, given the abundance of both tissues throughout the body. Based on the anti-inflammatory effects of veins and the proregenerative environment established by muscle tissue, this approach has been studied in various preclinical and some clinical trials. There is still no comprehensive systematic summary to conclude efficacy and feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects. Given this lack of a conclusive summary, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the potential of muscle-in-vein conduits. This work’s main findings are profound discrepancies regarding the results following nerve repair by means of muscle-in-vein conduits in a preclinical or clinical setting. We identified differences in study methodology, inter-species neurobiology and the limited number of clinical studies to be the main reasons for the still inconclusive results. In conclusion, we advise for large animal studies to elucidate the feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for repair of segmental defects of critical size in mixed nerves.Johannes C. HeinzelMai Quyen NguyenLaura KefalianakisCosima PrahmAdrien DaigelerDavid HercherJonas KolbenschlagNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-12 (2021) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Medicine R Science Q |
| spellingShingle |
Medicine R Science Q Johannes C. Heinzel Mai Quyen Nguyen Laura Kefalianakis Cosima Prahm Adrien Daigeler David Hercher Jonas Kolbenschlag A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| description |
Abstract The gold-standard method for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects, the autologous nerve graft, has several drawbacks in terms of tissue availability and donor site morbidity. Therefore, feasible alternatives to autologous nerve grafts are sought. Muscle-in-vein conduits have been proposed as an alternative to autologous nerve grafts almost three decades ago, given the abundance of both tissues throughout the body. Based on the anti-inflammatory effects of veins and the proregenerative environment established by muscle tissue, this approach has been studied in various preclinical and some clinical trials. There is still no comprehensive systematic summary to conclude efficacy and feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for reconstruction of segmental nerve defects. Given this lack of a conclusive summary, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the potential of muscle-in-vein conduits. This work’s main findings are profound discrepancies regarding the results following nerve repair by means of muscle-in-vein conduits in a preclinical or clinical setting. We identified differences in study methodology, inter-species neurobiology and the limited number of clinical studies to be the main reasons for the still inconclusive results. In conclusion, we advise for large animal studies to elucidate the feasibility of muscle-in-vein conduits for repair of segmental defects of critical size in mixed nerves. |
| format |
article |
| author |
Johannes C. Heinzel Mai Quyen Nguyen Laura Kefalianakis Cosima Prahm Adrien Daigeler David Hercher Jonas Kolbenschlag |
| author_facet |
Johannes C. Heinzel Mai Quyen Nguyen Laura Kefalianakis Cosima Prahm Adrien Daigeler David Hercher Jonas Kolbenschlag |
| author_sort |
Johannes C. Heinzel |
| title |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| title_short |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| title_full |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| title_fullStr |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| title_full_unstemmed |
A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| title_sort |
systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing muscle-in-vein conduits with autologous nerve grafts for nerve reconstruction |
| publisher |
Nature Portfolio |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/fa1db15e4ba74fe9b07c163e79a1025b |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT johannescheinzel asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT maiquyennguyen asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT laurakefalianakis asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT cosimaprahm asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT adriendaigeler asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT davidhercher asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT jonaskolbenschlag asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT johannescheinzel systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT maiquyennguyen systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT laurakefalianakis systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT cosimaprahm systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT adriendaigeler systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT davidhercher systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction AT jonaskolbenschlag systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofstudiescomparingmuscleinveinconduitswithautologousnervegraftsfornervereconstruction |
| _version_ |
1718379325704634368 |