中国神经再生研究(英文版) ›› 2015, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (1): 79-83.doi: 10.4103/1673-5374.150710

• 原著:周围神经损伤修复保护与再生 • 上一篇    下一篇

神经延长器修复短距离周围神经缺损

  

  • 收稿日期:2014-12-11 出版日期:2015-01-15 发布日期:2015-01-15

Use of nerve elongator to repair short-distance peripheral nerve defects: a prospective randomized study

Lu Bai 1, Tian-bing Wang 1, Xin Wang 2, Wei-wen Zhang 2, Ji-hai Xu 2, Xiao-ming Cai 2, Dan-ya Zhou 2, Li-bing Cai 2, Jia-dong Pan 2,Min-tao Tian 2, Hong Chen 2, *, Dian-ying Zhang 1, Zhong-guo Fu 1, Pei-xun Zhang 1, *, Bao-guo Jiang 1, *   

  1. 1 Department of Trauma and Orthopedics, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing, China
    2 Department of Hand Surgery, Ningbo No.6 Hospital, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province, China
  • Received:2014-12-11 Online:2015-01-15 Published:2015-01-15
  • Contact: Bao-guo Jiang, M.D.,jiangbaoguo@vip.sina.com. Pei-xun Zhang, M.D., zhangpeixun@126.com. Hong Chen, chenhong_6612@163.com.
  • Supported by:

    This study was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China, No. 31171150, 31271284, 81171146, 30971526, 30801169; the National Program on Key Basic Research Project of China (973 Program), No. 2014CB542206; Program for New Star in Science and Technology of Beijing of China, No. A-2008-10; Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University of Ministry of Education of China, No. BMU20110270; and the National Natural Science Foundation of China for Distinguished Youth, No. 31100860.

摘要:

周围神经短距离缺损后,采取屈伸邻近关节减小神经断端的缺损距离、“神经夹板”缝合或神经套管连接都存在一定不足,为解决此问题,作者所在课题组发明了一种可实现局部无张力神经缝合的修复术中神经延长器,并且在试验动物短距离周围神经缺损修复方面取得了良好效果。实验对比术中神经延长器和传统缝合修复肘关节周围神经短距离横断损伤。术后近期(3,6个月)及远期(1年)的随访结果显示,与传统缝合患者相比,接受术中神经延长器修复患者的早期神经功能恢复较好,但术后远期神经恢复的效果并无显著差异;而由于神经在近乎无张力的条件下缝合,术后肘关节的制动时间减少,接受术中神经延长器修复短距离的神经缺损的患者肘关节功能的康复效果明显优于传统缝合者,且无安全隐患,证实修复术中神经延长器修复周围神经短距离缺损安全有效。

关键词: 神经再生, 外周神经缺损, 神经延长器, 英国医学研究委员会评分, 神经功能, 预后

Abstract:

Repair techniques for short-distance peripheral nerve defects, including adjacent joint flexion to reduce the distance between the nerve stump defects, “nerve splint” suturing, and nerve sleeve connection, have some disadvantages. Therefore, we designed a repair technique involving intraoperative tension-free application of a nerve elongator and obtained good outcomes in the repair of short-distance peripheral nerve defects in a previous animal study. The present study compared the clinical outcomes between the use of this nerve elongator and performance of the conventional method in the repair of short-distance transection injuries in human elbows. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month postoperative follow-up results demonstrated that early neurological function recovery was better in the nerve elongation group than in the conventional group, but no significant difference in long-term neurological function recovery was detected between the two groups. In the nerve elongation group, the nerves were sutured without tension, and the duration of postoperative immobilization of the elbow was decreased. Elbow function rehabilitation was significantly better in the nerve elongation group than in the control group. Moreover, there were no security risks. The results of this study confirm that the use of this nerve elongator for repair of short-distance peripheral nerve defects is safe and effective.

Key words: nerve regeneration, peripheral nerve deficiency, nerve elongator, British Medical Research Council scale, neurological function, prognosis, NSFC grants, neural regeneration