The effect of in vivo created vascularized neurotube on peripheric nerve regeneration.

INTRODUCTION

Creating vascularized nerve conduits for treatment of nerve gaps have been researched, however, these methods need microsurgical anastomosis thereby complicating the nerve repair process. Thus, the concept of vascularized nerve conduits has not popularized up till now. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of vascularized and non-vascularized biological conduits on peripheral nerve regeneration.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

Following ethical board approval, 15 Sprague-Dawley rats were used in the study. The rats were equally divided into three groups. In group I, a silicon rod was inserted next to the sciatic nerve of the rat and connective tissue generated around this rod was used as a vascularized biological conduit. In group II, a silicon rod was inserted into the dorsum of the rat and connective tissue generated around this rod was used as a non-vascularized biological conduit. In group III, autogenic nerve graft was used to repair the nerve gap. The contralateral sciatic nerve is used as a control in all rats. Macroscopic, electrophysiological and histomorphometric evaluations were performed to determine the nerve regeneration.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between groups, in terms of latency. However, the mean amplitude of group I was found to be higher than other groups. The difference between group I and II was statistically significant. Myelinated axonal counts in group I was significantly higher than groups II and III.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that vascularized biological conduits provided better nerve regeneration when compared to autografts and non-vascularized biological conduits. Creation and application of vascularized conduits by using the technique described here is easy. Although this method is not an alternative to autogenic nerve grafts, our results are promising and encouraging for further studies.