Bioengineered nerve conduits and wraps for peripheral nerve repair of the upper limb.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic peripheral nerve injury is common and incurs significant cost to individuals and society. Healing following direct nerve repair or repair with autograft is slow and can be incomplete. Several bioengineered nerve wraps or devices have become available as an alternative to direct repair or autologous nerve graft. Nerve wraps attempt to reduce axonal escape across a direct repair site and nerve devices negate the need for a donor site defect, required by an autologous nerve graft. Comparative evidence to guide clinicians in their potential use is lacking. We collated existing evidence to guide the clinical application of currently available nerve wraps and conduits. OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the effects and complication rates of licensed bioengineered nerve conduits or wraps for surgical repair of traumatic peripheral nerve injuries of the upper limb. To compare effects and complications against the current gold surgical standard (direct repair or nerve autograft). SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was 26 January 2022. We searched online and, where not accessible, contacted societies' secretariats to review abstracts from the British Surgical Society of the Hand, International Federation of Surgical Societies of the Hand, Federation of European Surgical Societies of the Hand, and the American Society for Peripheral Nerve from October 2007 to October 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of nerve repair in the upper limb using a bioengineered wrap or conduit, with at least 12 months of follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane procedures. Our primary outcomes were 1. muscle strength and 2. sensory recovery at 24 months or more. Our secondary outcomes were 3. British Medical Research Council (BMRC) grading, 4. integrated functional outcome (Rosén Model Instrument (RMI)), 5. touch threshold, 6. two-point discrimination, 7. cold intolerance, 8. impact on daily living measured using the Disability of Arm Shoulder and Hand Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (DASH-PROM), 9. sensory nerve action potential, 10. cost of the device, and 11. adverse events (any and specific serious adverse events (further surgery)). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies involving 213 participants and 257 nerve injuries reconstructed with wraps or conduits (129 participants) or standard repair (128 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Of those in the standard repair group, 119 nerve injuries were managed with direct epineurial repair, and nine autologous nerve grafts were performed. One study excluded the outcome data for the repair using an autologous nerve graft from their analysis, as it was the only autologous nerve graft in the study, so data were available for 127 standard repairs. There was variation in the functional outcome measures reported and the time postoperatively at which they were recorded. Mean sensory recovery, assessed with BMRC sensory grading (range S0 to S4, higher score considered better) was 0.03 points higher in the device group (range 0.43 lower to 0.49 higher; 1 RCT, 28 participants; very low-certainty evidence) than in the standard repair group (mean 2.75 points), which suggested little or no difference between the groups, but the evidence is very uncertain. There may be little or no difference at 24 months in mean touch thresholds between standard repair (0.81) and repair using devices, which was 0.01 higher but this evidence is also very uncertain (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 lower to 0.08 higher; 1 trial, 32 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data were not available to assess BMRC motor grading at 24 months or more. Repair using bioengineered devices may not improve integrated functional outcome scores at 24 months more than standard techniques, as assessed by the Rosén Model Instrument (RMI; range 0 to 3, higher scores better); the CIs allow for both no important difference and a better outcome with standard repair (mean RMI 1.875), compared to the device group (0.17 lower, 95% CI 0.38 lower to 0.05 higher; P = 0.13; 2 trials, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). Data from one study suggested that the five-year postoperative outcome of RMI may be slightly improved after repair using a device (mean difference (MD) 0.23, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.38; 1 trial, 28 participants; low-certainty evidence). No studies measured impact on daily living using DASH-PROM. The proportion of people with adverse events may be greater with nerve wraps or conduits than with standard techniques, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 7.15, 95% CI 1.74 to 29.42; 5 RCTs, 213 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This corresponds to 10 adverse events per 1000 people in the standard repair group and 68 per 1000 (95% CI 17 to 280) in the device group. The use of nerve repair devices may be associated with a greater need for revision surgery but this evidence is also very uncertain (12/129 device repairs required revision surgery (removal) versus 0/127 standard repairs; RR 7.61, 95% CI 1.48 to 39.02; 5 RCTs, 256 nerve repairs; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available evidence, this review does not support use of currently available nerve repair devices over standard repair. There is significant heterogeneity in participants, injury pattern, repair timing, and outcome measures and their timing across studies of nerve repair using bioengineered devices, which make comparisons unreliable. Studies were generally small and at high or unclear risk of bias. These factors render the overall certainty of evidence for any outcome low or very low. The data reviewed here provide some evidence that more people may experience adverse events with use of currently available bioengineered devices than with standard repair techniques, and the need for revision surgery may also be greater. The evidence for sensory recovery is very uncertain and there are no data for muscle strength at 24 months (our primary outcome measures). We need further trials, adhering to a minimum standard of outcome reporting (with at least 12 months' follow-up, including integrated sensorimotor evaluation and patient-reported outcomes) to provide high-certainty evidence and facilitate more detailed analysis of effectiveness of emerging, increasingly sophisticated, bioengineered repair devices.

The introduction of plastic and reconstructive surgery to the University of Glasgow undergraduate medical core curriculum.

Misperceptions of plastic surgery remain common among medical students and the medical community. This creates barriers in recruitment to specialty and patient referral. Before this study, there was no formal plastic surgery teaching in University of Glasgow undergraduate medical core curriculum. A plastic surgery teaching pilot was implemented for fourth year students. Oncoplastic breast surgery was used as an example of gold standard multidisciplinary reconstructive surgery. Surveys collected data before and after provision of teaching across four parameters; identification of plastic surgery subspecialties, understanding of plastic surgery, opinion of the pilot and curriculum, career preferences and gender. The response rate was 57% (n=160). The most and least recognised subspecialties were burns (48% (n=75)) and perineal and lower limb reconstruction (0% (n=0)), respectively, with more students identifying aesthetic surgery (16% (n=26)) than hand (9% (n=15)) or skin cancer surgery (6% (n=9)). The majority (129 (81%)) thought plastic surgery was poorly represented in their curriculum and wanted further information (98 (61%)). Reported understanding of plastic surgery significantly improved (p≤0.00005). Those interested in surgical careers increased from 39% (n=63) to 41% (n=66) with more males than females reporting interest (p≤0.05). This study introduced plastic and reconstructive surgery into the undergraduate curriculum and led to further increased plastic surgery teaching. It improved student understanding, desire to gain more experience in the specialty and interest in surgical careers. Teaching students about subspecialties is vital to dispel misconceptions, ensure appropriate referrals and ignite interest in those with aptitude for surgical careers.

Microtopographical cues promote peripheral nerve regeneration via transient mTORC2 activation.

Despite microsurgical repair, recovery of function following peripheral nerve injury is slow and often incomplete. Outcomes could be improved by an increased understanding of the molecular biology of regeneration and by translation of experimental bioengineering strategies. Topographical cues have been shown to be powerful regulators of the rate and directionality of neurite regeneration, and in this study we investigated the downstream molecular effects of linear micropatterned structures in an organotypic explant model. Linear topographical cues enhanced neurite outgrowth and our results demonstrated that the mTOR pathway is important in regulating these responses. mTOR gene expression peaked between 48 and 72h, coincident with the onset of rapid neurite outgrowth and glial migration, and correlated with neurite length at 48h. mTOR protein was located to glia and in a punctate distribution along neurites. mTOR levels peaked at 72h and were significantly increased by patterned topography (p<0.05). Furthermore, the topographical cues could override pharmacological inhibition. Downstream phosphorylation assays and inhibition of mTORC1 using rapamycin highlighted mTORC2 as an important mediator, and more specific therapeutic target. Quantitative immunohistochemistry confirmed the presence of the mTORC2 component rictor at the regenerating front where it co-localised with F-actin and vinculin. Collectively, these results provide a deeper understanding of the mechanism of action of topography on neural regeneration, and support the incorporation of topographical patterning in combination with pharmacological mTORC2 potentiation within biomaterial constructs used to repair peripheral nerves. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Peripheral nerve injury is common and functionally devastating. Despite microsurgical repair, healing is slow and incomplete, with lasting functional deficit. There is a clear need to translate bioengineering approaches and increase our knowledge of the molecular processes controlling nerve regeneration to improve the rate and success of healing. Topographical cues are powerful determinants of neurite outgrowth and represent a highly translatable engineering strategy. Here we demonstrate, for the first time, that microtopography potentiates neurite outgrowth via the mTOR pathway, with the mTORC2 subtype being of particular importance. These results give further evidence for the incorporation of microtopographical cues into peripheral nerve regeneration conduits and indicate that mTORC2 may be a suitable therapeutic target to potentiate nerve regeneration.

Psoas abscess and severe fasciitis due to a caecal carcinoma.

A man in his mid-50s presented with a painful and swollen right thigh and buttock. This was accompanied by a month long history of flank pain, back pain, vague abdominal pain, limp, fever and weight loss. On examination, there was extensive erythaema, heat, tenderness, oedema and crepitus over his right buttock and thigh. The patient was referred to plastic surgery to exclude necrotising fasciitis of the gluteal and thigh region. After CT imaging, a psoas abscess (PA) and caecal mass were identified. Subsequent right hemicolectomy, PA drainage and debridement of his right thigh were performed. This case reminds clinicians of the many non-specific ways a PA can present and that a high level of suspicion assists in making a timely diagnosis.

A population of large neurons in laminae III and IV of the rat spinal cord that have long dorsal dendrites and lack the neurokinin 1 receptor.

The dorsal horn of the rat spinal cord contains a population of large neurons with cell bodies in laminae III or IV, that express the neurokinin 1 receptor (NK1r) and have long dorsal dendrites that branch extensively within the superficial laminae. In this study, we have identified a separate population of neurons that have similar dendritic morphology, but lack the NK1r. These cells also differ from the NK1r-expressing neurons in that they have significantly fewer contacts from substance P-containing axons and are not retrogradely labelled following injection of tracer into the caudal ventrolateral medulla. We also provide evidence that these cells do not belong to the postsynaptic dorsal column pathway or the spinothalamic tract. It is therefore likely that these cells do not have supraspinal projections. They may provide a route through which information transmitted by C fibres that lack neuropeptides is conveyed to deeper laminae. The present findings demonstrate the need for caution when attempting to classify neurons solely on the basis of somatodendritic morphology.