Recurrent laryngeal nerve regeneration using a self-assembling peptide hydrogel.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To regenerate defected recurrent laryngeal nerves (RLNs), various methods have been developed. However, no consistently effective treatments are currently available because of their insufficient functional recovery. RADA16-I, a self-assembling peptide used clinically as a hemostat, reportedly supports neurite outgrowth and functional synapse formation in vitro. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of RADA16-I hydrogels on transected RLNs in rats.
STUDY
DESIGN
Animal experiments with controls.
METHODS
Fifteen adult rats were divided into the following three groups: RADA16-I (+), RADA16-I (-), and neurectomy. A 6-mm gap of the left RLN was bridged using an 8-mm silicone tube in the RADA16-I (-) and RADA16-I (+) groups. Subsequently, RADA16-I hydrogel was injected into the tube in the RADA16-I (+) group. The surgical incisions were closed without any further treatment in the neurectomy group. After 8 weeks, laryngoscopy and electrophysiological and histological examinations were performed to evaluate the effect of RADA16-I on nerve regeneration and thyroarytenoid muscle atrophy.
RESULTS
Although most rats in the three groups exhibited no improvements of their vocal fold movement, partial recovery was observed in one rat in the RADA16-I (+) group. The neurofilament-positive areas and the number of myelinated nerves in the RADA16-I (+) group were significantly higher than in the RADA16-I (-) group. The area of the left thyroarytenoid muscle in the RADA16-I (+) group was significantly larger than that of the neurectomy group.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results suggested that RADA16-I hydrogel was effective for RLN regeneration.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 130:2420-2427, 2020.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.