Abstract
An: 2015, Nr.4, Articol Nr. 7
Title: 

POSSIBILITIES OF NERVE GRAFTING: CLASSICAL VERSUS MUSCLE IN VEIN NERVE GRAFT. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY

Authors: 

      Irina-Mihaela Hreniuc - University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr.T. Popa”, Iasi, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, PhD Student
      Camelia Tamaş, T. Stamate - University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr.T. Popa”, Iasi, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
      I. Rusu - University of Polytechnic, Bucarest, Faculty of Electronics, Telecommunications and Information Technology
      C.I. Stan - University of Medicine and Pharmacy “Gr.T. Popa”, Iasi, Department of Anatomy
      POSSIBILITIES OF NERVE GRAFTING: CLASSICAL VERSUS MUSCLE- IN-VEIN NERVE GRAFT. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY (Abstract): Introduction: A nerve graft should be used in the case of a neuroma, trauma or tumor, for restoration of nervous influx. Recovery takes several months, and the best timing for surgery is 6 months after the injury. Goal: Is to demonstrate that by stimulating muscle-in-vein nerve grafts with EMPF associated with Umm UHF the recovery-will be superior in comparison with the classic nerve graft. In this way we can provide useful alternatives for nerve grafting in case of lack of a nervous donor situs. Material and method: The method of study is clinical and experimental. We worked in the laboratory in optimal conditions for carrying out of muscles-in-vein nerve grafts (nerve grafts size 1.5 cm). The principles that we are based on are: using only the skeletal muscle fibers will produce loss of regenerated axons; a vein is a good guide for the regeneration of nerves but without skeletal muscle vein will close and stop migratory Schwann ; these cells will colonize the muscle-in-vein grafts mimicking the Lundborg biological room. The study was conducted on experimental animals (Wistar male rats) to whom we stimulated the nervous graft with EMPF associated with Umm UHF for 4 weeks. We used 20 experience animals in 2 equal groups (classical group and stimulated muscle-in-vein nerve grafts). Results: At 4 and respectively 6 weeks postoperative at the quality tests we observed the progress of the printing of the operated rat paw in comparison with the 1st day when the limb was completely paralyzed. Quantitatively the number of regenerated axons in the group with muscle-in-vein nerve grafts was significant bigger in comparison with the classical group (15%). Conclusion: The method using muscle-in-vein nerve graft stimulated with EMPF associated with Umm UHF it’s a good alternative for nerve grafting in comparison with classical nerve grafting. The relationship between cost and benefit in this case it’s an advantage because we use the local resources of the affected area. The motor results of nerve grafting in group 1 in comparison with group 2 were similar and in some cases better in group 1. Grafting with MVNG offers a better alternative for donor site regeneration in comparison with classical nerve grafts.
Key words: NERVE GRAFT, VEIN, MUSCLE, STIMULATION
archive
Current edition
2018
Previous editions