Heitzer Marius, Kilic Konrad, Merfort Ricarda, Winnand Philipp, Emonts Caroline, Bock Anna, Ooms Mark, Steiner Timm, Hölzle Frank, Modabber Ali
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 13, 52074, Aachen, Germany.
Department of Orthopedics, Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital of RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Eur J Med Res. 2024 May 3;29(1):264. doi: 10.1186/s40001-024-01858-9.
The fundamental prerequisite for prognostically favorable postoperative results of peripheral nerve repair is stable neurorrhaphy without interruption and gap formation.
This study evaluates 60 neurorrhaphies on femoral chicken nerves in terms of the procedure and the biomechanical properties. Sutured neurorrhaphies (n = 15) served as control and three sutureless adhesive-based nerve repair techniques: Fibrin glue (n = 15), Histoacryl glue (n = 15), and the novel polyurethane adhesive VIVO (n = 15). Tensile and elongation tests of neurorrhaphies were performed on a tensile testing machine at a displacement rate of 20 mm/min until failure. The maximum tensile force and elongation were recorded.
All adhesive-based neurorrhaphies were significant faster in preparation compared to sutured anastomoses (p < 0.001). Neurorrhaphies by sutured (102.8 [cN]; p < 0.001), Histoacryl (91.5 [cN]; p < 0.001) and VIVO (45.47 [cN]; p < 0.05) withstood significant higher longitudinal tensile forces compared to fibrin glue (10.55 [cN]). VIVO, with △L/L of 6.96 [%], showed significantly higher elongation (p < 0.001) compared to neurorrhaphy using fibrin glue.
Within the limitations of an in vitro study the adhesive-based neurorrhaphy technique with VIVO and Histoacryl have the biomechanical potential to offer alternatives to sutured neuroanastomosis because of their stability, and faster handling. Further in vivo studies are required to evaluate functional outcomes and confirm safety.
周围神经修复术后获得良好预后结果的基本前提是神经缝合稳定,无中断和间隙形成。
本研究从操作过程和生物力学特性方面评估了60例鸡股神经的神经缝合情况。缝合的神经缝合术(n = 15)作为对照,以及三种基于粘合剂的无缝合神经修复技术:纤维蛋白胶(n = 15)、组织粘合剂(n = 15)和新型聚氨酯粘合剂VIVO(n = 15)。在拉伸试验机上以20 mm/min的位移速率对神经缝合处进行拉伸和伸长测试,直至失效。记录最大拉伸力和伸长量。
与缝合吻合术相比,所有基于粘合剂的神经缝合术在准备过程中明显更快(p < 0.001)。与纤维蛋白胶(10.55 [cN])相比,缝合(102.8 [cN];p < 0.001)、组织粘合剂(91.5 [cN];p < 0.001)和VIVO(45.47 [cN];p < 0.05)的神经缝合术承受的纵向拉伸力明显更高。VIVO的△L/L为6.96 [%],与使用纤维蛋白胶的神经缝合术相比,伸长率明显更高(p < 0.001)。
在体外研究的局限性内,基于粘合剂的神经缝合技术VIVO和组织粘合剂因其稳定性和更快的操作速度,在生物力学方面有潜力为缝合神经吻合术提供替代方案。需要进一步的体内研究来评估功能结果并确认安全性。