A comparative assessment of lengthening followed by end-to-end repair and isograft repair of chronically injured peripheral nerves.

In order to repair chronic nerve injuries (injuries repaired after a long delay), the damaged nerve segments are resected and stumps are bridged by grafts. Autografts remain the gold-standard, but outcomes are typically poor, even after long periods of recovery. In a recent study, we described the use of a nerve lengthening device to gradually elongate the proximal stump of a transected nerve towards the distal stump, enabling a tension-free end-to-end repair.

Nerve lengthening and subsequent end-to-end repair yield more favourable outcomes compared with autograft repair of rat sciatic nerve defects.

Outcomes of end-to-end nerve repairs are more successful compared with outcomes of repairs bridged by nerve grafts. However, end-to-end repairs are not always possible for large nerve gaps, as excessive tension may cause catastrophic failure. In this study, we built on previous nerve-lengthening studies to test the hypotheses that gradual lengthening of the proximal stump across a large nerve gap enables an end-to-end repair and such a repair results in more favourable regenerative outcomes than autografts, which represent the gold standard in bridging nerve gaps.