Zhang F, Cheng C, Chin B T, Ho P R, Weibel T J, Lineaweaver W C, Buncke H J
Microsurgical Replantation and Transplantation Service, Davies Medical Center, San Francisco, CA 94114, USA.
Microsurgery. 1998;18(4):276-81. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2752(1998)18:4<276::aid-micr12>3.0.co;2-v.
In this comprehensive investigation, we studied three different neurorrhaphy models in an attempt to elucidate the potential of termino-lateral nerve repair to original and adjacent nerves. In experimental group 1, the peroneal nerve was sectioned and then attached to the posterior tibial nerve in a termino-lateral fashion. In experiment group 2, the motor nerves to the gastrocnemius muscle were sectioned and then attached to the posterior tibial nerve in a termino-lateral fashion. In experimental group 3, the obturator nerve (L2-4) was sectioned and attached to the sciatic nerve (L4-6) in a termino-lateral fashion. For the control in each group, the same type of nerve used in each respective group was transected without repair. Experimental groups 1 and 2 showed viable axons in the peroneal nerve distal to the neurorrhaphy site. Experimental group 3 showed no viable axons at these sites. No regeneration was observed in the transected nerve without repair in all three control groups. This study suggests that termino-lateral neurorrhaphy is a viable means of repairing damaged nerves if the distal segment of the sectioned nerve is reattached to its original trunk distal to its original branch point. However, the results from experimental group 3 demonstrate that termino-lateral neurorrhaphy cannot be used to repair nerves when the donor and recipient nerves originate from different spinal cord levels.
