The effectiveness of acellular nerve allografts compared to autografts in animal models:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Treatment of nerve injuries proves to be a worldwide clinical challenge. Acellular nerve allografts are suggested to be a promising alternative for bridging a nerve gap to the current gold standard, an autologous nerve graft. Objective To systematically review the efficacy of the acellular nerve allograft, its difference from the gold standard (the nerve autograft) and to discuss its possible indications. Material and methods PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched until the 4th of January 2022. Original peer reviewed paper that presented 1) distinctive data; 2) a clear comparison between not immunologically processed acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers; 3) was performed in laboratory animals of all species and sex. Meta analyses and subgroup analyses (for graft length and species) were conducted for muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count diameter, tetanic contraction and amplitude using a Random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted on graft length and species. Results Fifty articles were included in this review and all were included in the meta-analyses. An acellular allograft resulted in a significantly lower muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count and smaller diameter, tetanic contraction compared to an autologous nerve graft. No difference was found in amplitude between acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers. Post hoc subgroup analyses of graft length showed a significant reduced muscle weight in long grafts versus small and medium length grafts. All included studies showed a large variance in methodological design. Conclusion Our review shows that the included studies, investigating the use of acellular allografts, showed a large variance in methodological design and are as a consequence difficult to compare. Nevertheless, our results indicate that treating a nerve gap with an allograft results in an inferior nerve recovery compared to an autograft in seven out of eight outcomes assessed in experimental animals. In addition, based on our preliminary post hoc subgroup analyses we suggest that when an allograft is being used an allograft in short and medium (0-1cm, &gt; 1-2cm) nerve gaps is preferred over an allograft in long (&gt; 2cm) nerve gaps.</p

The effectiveness of acellular nerve allografts compared to autografts in animal models:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Treatment of nerve injuries proves to be a worldwide clinical challenge. Acellular nerve allografts are suggested to be a promising alternative for bridging a nerve gap to the current gold standard, an autologous nerve graft. Objective To systematically review the efficacy of the acellular nerve allograft, its difference from the gold standard (the nerve autograft) and to discuss its possible indications. Material and methods PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched until the 4th of January 2022. Original peer reviewed paper that presented 1) distinctive data; 2) a clear comparison between not immunologically processed acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers; 3) was performed in laboratory animals of all species and sex. Meta analyses and subgroup analyses (for graft length and species) were conducted for muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count diameter, tetanic contraction and amplitude using a Random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted on graft length and species. Results Fifty articles were included in this review and all were included in the meta-analyses. An acellular allograft resulted in a significantly lower muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count and smaller diameter, tetanic contraction compared to an autologous nerve graft. No difference was found in amplitude between acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers. Post hoc subgroup analyses of graft length showed a significant reduced muscle weight in long grafts versus small and medium length grafts. All included studies showed a large variance in methodological design. Conclusion Our review shows that the included studies, investigating the use of acellular allografts, showed a large variance in methodological design and are as a consequence difficult to compare. Nevertheless, our results indicate that treating a nerve gap with an allograft results in an inferior nerve recovery compared to an autograft in seven out of eight outcomes assessed in experimental animals. In addition, based on our preliminary post hoc subgroup analyses we suggest that when an allograft is being used an allograft in short and medium (0-1cm, &gt; 1-2cm) nerve gaps is preferred over an allograft in long (&gt; 2cm) nerve gaps.</p

Assessing service quality of e-waste recycling: A case study from Putrajaya, Malaysia

The quality of recycling services will reflect the effectiveness of recycling performance further improvements. Putrajaya residents were selected as a study site to evaluate the recycling services and assess the ability of the services provided. Data were collected using a stratified random sampling of the households using the questionnaires that have been prior tested for reliability.The critical incident technique (CIT) was used to identify and analyse the satisfaction and dissatisfaction of recycling services. Five successful service constructs identified were a good feeling, secured environment, facilities and efficiency, educational and peer pressure.The paper highlights the form of recovery strategies undertaken by the authorities as perceived by the households

Incidence of Chronic Postsurgical Pain after Upper Extremity Surgery and its Correlation with Preoperative Pain

Background: The incidence of chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) after upper extremity surgery is not known. The goal was to study CPSP at 5 years postoperative and to investigate patient, surgical, and anesthetic risk factors. Methods: Patients scheduled for elective upper extremity surgery were included, and numeric rating scale (NRS) score for pain was obtained preoperatively and at 5 years postoperatively. According to the International Association for the Study of Pain definition, CPSP was defined as an increase in NRS compared with preoperatively. Results: A total 168 patients were contacted at 5 years postoperatively. Incidence of CPSP was 22%, and 35% had an NRS score of 4 or more. The number of patients with an NRS score of 0 and with an NRS score of 4 or more preoperatively was higher in the no-CPSP group, with P values of 0.019 and 0.008, respectively. Of the patients with no preoperative pain, 34% developed CPSP. Regional anesthesia was associated with a lower CPSP incidence (P = 0.001) and was more frequently applied in surgery on bony structures and in patients with a preoperative NRS score of 4 or more. Conclusions: The incidence CPSP was 22%. Patients with no pain or an NRS score of 4 or more preoperatively were less likely to develop CPSP, but individual susceptibility to pain and success of the surgery may be of influence. One-third of the patients with no preoperative pain developed CPSP. More studies are needed to reveal the exact relation between brachial plexus anesthesia and CPSP

Takraw antara regu, pasukan dipisahkan

AIM To determine which of the common used incision techniques has the lowest chance of iatrogenic damage to the nerves which at risk are the superficial branch of the radial nerve (SBRN) and the Lateral Antebrachial Cutaneous Nerve (LABCN). METHODS Twenty embalmed arms were dissected and the course of the SBRN and the LABCN in each individual arm was marked and the distance between the two branches of the SBRN at the location of the First Extensor Compartment (FEC) was measured. This data was used as input in a visualization tool called Computer Assisted Anatomy Mapping (CASAM) to map the course of the nerves in each individual arm. RESULTS This image visualizes that in 90% of the arms, one branch of the SBRN crosses the FEC and one branch runs volar to the compartment. The distance between the two branches was 7.8 mm at the beginning of the FEC and 10.2 mm at the end. Finally the angle of incision at which the chance of damage to the nerves is lowest, is 19.4 degrees volar to the radius. CONCLUSION CASAM shows the complexity of the course of the SBRN over the FEC. None of the four widely used incision techniques has a significantly lower chance of iatrogenic nerve damage. Surgical skills are paramount to prevent iatrogenic nerve damage

Is the outcome of a revision carpal tunnel release as good as those of a primary release? A matched cohort study

Objective: This study aimed to compare primary and revision carpal tunnel release outcomes in all patients with carpal tunnel syndrome and when corrected for baseline severity and demographics. Methods: A total of 903 hands of primary and 132 hands of revision patients underwent carpal tunnel release and patients completed online questionnaires on demographics, clinical severity, and satisfaction. The primary outcome measure, the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ), was administered at intake and six months after surgery. Results: The BCTQ total score at six months was better in primary (1.55±0.58) than revision patients (1.94±0.73, p=<0.001), and primary patients improved more on the BCTQ total score (1.10±0.71 vs. 0.90±0.72, p=0.003). In patients matched on similar baseline characteristics using propensity score matching, the BCTQ total score at six months was also better in primary patients (1.65±0.63) than in revision patients (1.92±0.73, p=0.002), and primary patients still had more improvement in BCTQ total score (1.18±0.73 vs. 0.89±0.73, p=0.004). Conclusions: This study shows that the outcome after revision carpal tunnel release is only 16% worse compared to primary carpal tunnel release. Preoperative symptom severity, functional status, and demographics may play a role since correcting for these factors reduces the difference in outcome between primary and revision CTR

A Systematic Review on Long-Term Postsurgical Pain Outcomes:What Is the Effect of Upper Extremity Regional Anesthesia?

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain is a recognized complication of surgery, and it has been hypothesized that regional anesthesia might reduce the risk of development of chronic pain after upper extremity surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to assess whether in patients undergoing elective upper extremity surgery (P), regional anesthesia (I), compared to general anesthesia (C), would result in lower long-term (&gt;3 months) postoperative pain intensity (O). We included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our primary outcome was numerical rating score or visual analogue scale for pain, at &gt;3 months postoperatively. The Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collections, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases were searched for all reports assessing pain at &gt;3 months after upper extremity surgery under general versus regional anesthesia. Secondary outcomes were: opioid prescription filling, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) incidence, the Mayo Wrist Score (MWS), and scores on the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Quality (or certainty) of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) and nonrandomized trials (ROBINS-I). RESULTS: This review included 14 studies, comprising 7 RCTs and 7 nonrandomized studies. Six of the 7 studies (4 RCTs, N = 273; 2 nonrandomized studies, N = 305) using a pain score, our primary outcome, report comparable long-term postoperative pain scores after regional and general anesthesia. Six of the 7 studies using our secondary outcomes report comparable long-term outcomes in terms of opioid prescription filling (2 retrospective cohort studies [RCSs], N = 89,256), CRPS incidence (1 RCT, N = 301), MWS (1 RCT and 1 RCS, N = 215), and DASH score (1 RCT, N = 36). Comparable outcomes were reported in all 7 RCTs (N = 778) and in 5 of the 7 nonrandomized studies, comprising 5 RCSs (N = 89,608). Two prospective observational studies (POSTs), comprising 279 patients, report a statistically significant difference in outcomes, with less pain and better DASH scores after brachial plexus anesthesia. All 14 studies provided moderate to very low certainty evidence, and there was a serious risk of bias due to confounding bias in 5 of the 7 nonrandomized studies (N = 631). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review indicate that upper extremity regional anesthesia, compared to general anesthesia, is unlikely to change pain intensity at &gt;3 months postoperatively.</p