[Clinical effect observation of biodegradable conduit small gap tublization repairing peripheral nerve injury].

Objective: To observe the clinical effect of biodegradable conduit small gap tublization to repair peripheral nerve injury.

Methods: In the study, 30 cases of fresh peripheral nerve injury in the upper extremities were recruited. After formally informed and obtaining the consent, the recruited patients were divided into the degradable chitin conduit tublization group (experimental group: 15 cases) and traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy group (control group: 15 cases). Their nerve functional recovery conditions were clinically observed according to the standard score methods provided by SHEN Ning-jiang and British Medical Research Council. The excellent and good rates of the overall nerve functional recovery were calculated. The electrophysiologic study was carried out after 6 months.

Results: Of the total 30 cases, 28 were followed up, and there were 14 cases in the degradable chitin conduit tublization group and traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy group. The operation procedure was very simple, and the mean suture time [(8.0±0.8) min] was 20% shorter than that of the traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy group [(10.0±0.6) min]. All the wounds in the degradable chitin conduit tublization group healed as expected without rejection, hypersensitive reaction or anomalous draining. Electrophysiology examination results after 6 months displayed that the sensory nerves conduction velocity recovery rate was 77.37% of the normal value, and motor nerve conduction velocity recovery rate was 70.09% in the degradable chitin conduit tublization group. The sensory nerves conduction velocity recovery rate was 61.69% of the normal value, and motor nerve conduction velocity recovery rate was 56.15% in the traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy group. The exact propability methods was applied in the comparison of sensory and motor nerve conduction velocity recovery rate, and there was no statistically significant of two groups(sensory nerve conduction velocity recovery rate P=0.678;motor nerve conduction velocity recovery rate P=0.695). The combinated functional recovery excellent and good rates after repair in the degradable chitin conduit tublization group were 78.57%, while 28.57% in the traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy group. The Fisher's exact probabilistic method was applied in the comparison of combinated functional recovery excellent and good rates, and there was statistically significant of two groups(P=0.021).

Conclusion: The operation procedure of the degradable chitin conduit tublization is very simple and the clinical recovery effect is much better than that of the traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy. The biodegradable conduit small gap tublization methods to repair peripheral nerve injury has the possibility to substitute the traditional epineurial neurorrhaphy.