Nerve regeneration conduit from inverted human umbilical cord vessel in the treatment of proper palmar digital nerve sections

Treatment of digital nerve injuries, particularly in case of a gap, is challenging. Recovery of finger sensitivity is often incomplete and can impair personal and occupational activity. The need for better nerve regeneration has given rise to alternative treatments such as nerve conduits. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a conduit of freeze-dried inverted human umbilical cord vessel for regeneration in digital nerve section. Twenty-three patients with a mean nerve gap of 6.11 mm (range 2-30 mm and static 2-point discrimination (s2PD) > 15 mm underwent surgical repair of digital nerve section using a nerve regeneration conduit. The primary endpoint was recovery of sensitivity after conduit implantation. Secondary endpoints comprised progression of pain, functional symptoms, pressure threshold, hand-specific symptoms and disabilities, and restored innervation. Mean follow-up was 10.1 ± 4.1 months (range 1-14 months). Sensitivity recovered progressively in the months following implantation. There was a mean decrease of 8.54 mm in s2PD between baseline and last follow-up (p < 0.001). Complete innervation recovered in 83.3% of cases at last follow-up. Pressure threshold and hand-related quality of life improved significantly and symptoms due to nerve sectioning (pain, cold intolerance, hypoesthesia, hyperesthesia) resolved almost completely. There were no safety issues related to the nerve conduit. These results indicate that freeze-dried inverted human umbilical vessels can be a safe and effective option as conduit for digital nerve regeneration.

Nerve conduits for treating peripheral nerve injuries: A systematic literature review

Peripheral nerve injuries are a major public health problem. Nerve conduits have been developed in the recent years, although it is still not clear if they should replace nerve grafting and neurorrhaphy. This systematic review aims to gather evidence regarding the use of nerve conduits for peripheral nerve repair. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL) and Embase. Study selection and data extraction followed the PRISMA guidelines. The systematic review of the literature retrieved 6767 articles. Only 27 studies were retained accounting for 1022 patients: 10 randomized controlled trials, 15 case series and 2 cohort studies. Ten different types of tubes were described and a variety of evaluation methods were used to assess outcomes in terms of efficacy (motor and sensory recovery) and complications. The Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test and the static and moving 2-point discrimination test were the most commonly applied tests to evaluate nerve recovery. In general, outcomes showed no significant difference between groups. Synthetic conduits had more complications. Despite major methodological limitations in the studies, we can conclude that use of nerve conduits is preferable over suture repair and nerve grafting, as the functional recovery rates are above 80%. The choice of conduit is based on the surgeon's expertise, but use of synthetic conduits is discouraged due to their higher complication rates.