神经损伤后神经传导恢复的决定因素：压迫持续时间和神经纤维类型。
Determinants of nerve conduction recovery after nerve injuries: Compression duration and nerve fiber types.
作者信息
Tseng To-Jung, Hsiao Tin-Hsin, Hsieh Sung-Tsang, Hsieh Yu-Lin
机构信息
Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, 100 Shih-Chuan 1st Road, Kaohsiung, 80708, Taiwan.
出版信息
Muscle Nerve. 2015 Jul;52(1):107-12. doi: 10.1002/mus.24501. Epub 2015 May 28.
INTRODUCTION
The aims of this study were to determine the influences of: (1) timing of nerve decompression; and (2) nerve fiber types on the patterns of nerve conduction studies (NCS) after nerve injury.
METHODS
Nerve conduction studies (NCS) were performed on 3 models of nerve injury: (1) crush injury due to transient nerve compression (crush group); (2) chronic constriction injury (CCI), or permanent compression (CCI group); and (3) CCI with removal of ligatures, or delayed nerve decompression (De-CCI group).
RESULTS
There were distinct patterns of NCS recovery. The crush and De-CCI groups achieved similar motor nerve recovery, better than that of the CCI group. In contrast, recovery of sensory nerves was limited in the CCI and De-CCI groups and was lower than in the crush group.
CONCLUSIONS
Immediate relief of compression resulted in the best recovery of motor and sensory nerve conduction. In contrast, delayed decompression restored only motor nerve conduction.
引言
本研究的目的是确定：（1）神经减压的时机；以及（2）神经纤维类型对神经损伤后神经传导研究（NCS）模式的影响。
方法
对3种神经损伤模型进行神经传导研究（NCS）：（1）短暂性神经压迫导致的挤压伤（挤压组）；（2）慢性压迫性损伤（CCI），即永久性压迫（CCI组）；以及（3）去除结扎线的CCI，即延迟神经减压（De-CCI组）。
结果
NCS恢复存在明显模式。挤压组和De-CCI组的运动神经恢复情况相似，优于CCI组。相比之下，CCI组和De-CCI组的感觉神经恢复有限，低于挤压组。
结论
立即解除压迫可使运动和感觉神经传导获得最佳恢复。相比之下，延迟减压仅能恢复运动神经传导。
Zotero 插件