Atam Camettin, Orhan Zafer, Toplu Gaye, Serin Merdan, Karaduman Z Okan, Öztürk Ayhan
Clinic of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Kırklareli State Hospital, Kırklareli, Turkey.
Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Düzce University, School of Medicine, Düzce, Turkey.
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2020 May;54(3):330-336. doi: 10.5152/j.aott.2020.03.156.
The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of primary nerve repair using either ethyl-cyanoacrylate or conventional microsuture technique in a rat peripheral nerve injury model.
In this study, a total of 30 Wistar Albino rats weighing between 220 and 275 g were used. The rats were randomly divided into three groups (10 in each), including one control (group 1) and two experimental groups (group 2, conventional microsuture repair; group 3, cyanoacrylate repair). In each group, the sciatic nerve was identified and transected. No further intervention was performed in group 1. The nerve was repaired using the epineural technique with a 10/0 atraumatic nylon in group 2 and synthetic cyanoacrylate adhesive in group 3. At the fifth postoperative week, needle electromyography (EMG) was performed to measure distal latency, combined muscle action potential (CMAP), and motor nerve conduction velocity (MNCV). Following the EMG recordings, animals were euthanized. Nerve samples were collected to evaluate vacuolar degeneration, fibrosis, and foreign body reaction histopathologically.
In the EMG analysis, mean distal latency was significantly shorter in group 1 (0.85±0.09 ms) than in groups 2 (1.17±0.25 ms) (p=0.0052) and 3 (1.14±0.14 ms) (p=0.0026) while no significant differences existed between groups 2 and 3 (p>0.9999). The mean CMAP was greater in group 1 (10.5±0.35 mV) than in groups 2 (2.86±1.28 mV) (p=0.011) and 3 (2.16±1.34 mV) (p=0.0002), but there was no significant difference between groups 2 and 3 (p>0.9999). The mean MNCV was 53.5±5.95, 39.62±7.31, and 39.84±4.73 mm/sec in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. There was a significant difference between groups 1 and 2 (p=0.0052) and between 1 and 3 (p=0.0026), but not between 2 and 3 (p>0.9999). In the histopathological evaluation, the mean vacuolar degeneration score was 0, 2.12, and 1.88 in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No obvious difference was observed between groups 2 and 3 (p=0.743). The mean fibrosis score was 0, 1.62, and 1.77 in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. There was no significant difference between groups 2 and 3 (p=0.888). The mean foreign body reaction score was 0, 2.5, and 2.44 in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No difference was present between groups 2 and 3 (p=0.743).
Primary nerve repair using the cyanoacrylate adhesive may provide similar electrophysiological and histopathological results as compared to the conventional microsuture repair.
本研究旨在比较在大鼠周围神经损伤模型中,使用氰基丙烯酸乙酯或传统显微缝合技术进行一期神经修复的效果。
本研究共使用30只体重在220至275克之间的Wistar白化大鼠。大鼠被随机分为三组(每组10只),包括一个对照组(第1组)和两个实验组(第2组,传统显微缝合修复;第3组,氰基丙烯酸酯修复)。在每组中,识别并切断坐骨神经。第1组不进行进一步干预。第2组使用10/0无创伤尼龙线采用神经外膜技术修复神经,第3组使用合成氰基丙烯酸酯粘合剂修复神经。术后第5周,进行针极肌电图(EMG)检查,测量远端潜伏期、复合肌肉动作电位(CMAP)和运动神经传导速度(MNCV)。EMG记录后,对动物实施安乐死。收集神经样本,进行组织病理学评估,以评价空泡变性、纤维化和异物反应。
在EMG分析中,第1组的平均远端潜伏期(0.85±0.09毫秒)明显短于第2组(1.17±0.25毫秒)(p = 0.0052)和第3组(1.14±0.14毫秒)(p = 0.0026),而第2组和第3组之间无显著差异(p>0.9999)。第1组的平均CMAP(10.5±0.35毫伏)大于第2组(2.86±1.28毫伏)(p = 0.011)和第3组(2.16±1.34毫伏)(p = 0.0002),但第2组和第3组之间无显著差异(p>0.9999)。第1、2、3组的平均MNCV分别为53.5±5.95、39.62±7.3和39.84±4.73毫米/秒。第1组和第2组之间(p = 0.0052)以及第1组和第3组之间(p = 0.0026)存在显著差异,但第2组和第3组之间无显著差异(p>0.9999)。在组织病理学评估中,第1、2、3组的平均空泡变性评分分别为0、2.12和1.88。第2组和第3组之间未观察到明显差异(p = 0.743)。第1、2、3组的平均纤维化评分分别为0、1.62和1.77。第2组和第3组之间无显著差异(p = 0.888)。第1、2、3组的平均异物反应评分分别为0、2.5和2.44。第2组和第3组之间无差异(p = 0.743)。
与传统显微缝合修复相比,使用氰基丙烯酸酯粘合剂进行一期神经修复可能提供相似的电生理和组织病理学结果。