Background: Outcomes following digital nerve repair are suboptimal despite much research and various methods of repair. Increased tensile strength of the repair and decreased suture material at the repair site may be 2 methods of improving biologic and biomechanical outcomes, and conduit-assisted repair can aid in achieving both of these goals. Methods: Ninety-nine fresh-frozen digital nerves were equally divided into 11 different groups. Each group uses a different combination of number of sutures at the coaptation site and number of sutures at each end of the nerve-conduit junction, as well as 2 calibers of nylon suture. Nerves were transected, repaired with these various suture configurations using an AxoGuard conduit, and loaded to failure. Results: The 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that repairs performed with 8-0 suture have significantly higher maximum failure load compared with 9-0 suture repairs (P < .01). Increasing the number of sutures in the repair significantly increased the maximum failure load in all groups regardless of suture caliber used (P < .01). Repairs with 9-0 suture at the coaptation site did not jeopardize repair strength when compared with 8-0 suture. Conclusions: Conduit-assisted primary digital nerve repairs with 8-0 suture increases the maximum load to failure compared with repairs with 9-0 suture, as does increasing the overall number of sutures. Using 9-0 suture at the coaptation site with 8-0 suture at the nerve-conduit junction does not jeopardize tensile strength when compared with similar repairs using all 8-0 suture and may decrease inflammation at the repair site while still achieving sufficient tensile strength.
AlluinOWittmannCMarquesteT, et al. Functional recovery after peripheral nerve injury and implantation of a collagen guide. Biomaterials. 2009;30(3):363-373. doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.09.043.
2.
GiddinsGEWadePJAmisAA. Primary nerve repair: strength of repair with different gauges of nylon suture material. J Hand Surg Br. 1989;14(3):301-302.
3.
GoldbergSHJobinCMHayesAG, et al. Biomechanics and histology of intact and repaired digital nerves: an in vitro study. J Hand Surg Am. 2007;32(4):474-482. doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2006.12.008.
4.
IsaacsJEMcDanielCOOwenJR, et al. Comparative analysis of biomechanical performance of available “nerve glues.”J Hand Surg Am. 2008;33(6):893-899. doi:10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.02.009.
5.
LeeJ-YParisiTJFriedrichPF, et al. Does the addition of a nerve wrap to a motor nerve repair affect motor outcomes?Microsurgery. 2014;34(7):562-567. doi:10.1002/micr.22274.
6.
LevinthalRBrownWJRandRW. Comparison of fascicular, interfascicular and epineural suture techniques in the repair of simple nerve lacerations. J Neurosurg. 1977;47(5):744-750. doi:10.3171/jns.1977.47.5.0744.
7.
LiuCTBendaCELeweyFH. Tensile strength of human nerves; an experimental physical and histologic study. Arch Neurol Psychiatry. 1948;59(3):322-336.
8.
LongoFMHaymanEGDavisGE. Neurite-promoting factors and extracellular matrix components accumulating in vivo within nerve regeneration chambers. Brain Res. 1984;309:105-117.
9.
LundborgGDahlinLDanielsenN, et al. Trophism, tropism, and specificity in nerve regeneration. J Reconstr Microsurg. 1994;10:345-354.
10.
MartinsRSSiqueiraMGDa SilvaCF, et al. Overall assessment of regeneration in peripheral nerve lesion repair using fibrin glue, suture, or a combination of the 2 techniques in a rat model. Which is the ideal choice?Surg Neurol. 2005;64(suppl 1, S1):10-16; Discussion S1:16. doi:10.1016/j.surneu.2005.04.022.
MukherjeeSR. Tensile strength of nerves during healing. Br J Surg. 1953;41(166):192-195.
13.
NishimuraMTMazzerNBarbieriCH, et al. Mechanical resistance of peripheral nerve repair with biological glue and with conventional suture at different postoperative times. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2008;24(5):327-332. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1080535.
14.
OwusuAMayedaBIssacsJ. Surgeon perspectives on alternative nerve repair techniques. Hand. 2014;9:29-35.
15.
PovlsenB. A new fibrin seal in primary repair of peripheral nerves. J Hand Surg Br. 1994;19(1):43-47.
16.
RennerACserkutiFHankissJ. Late results after nerve transplantation on the upper extremities. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2004;36:13-18.
17.
SameemMWoodTJBainJR. A systematic review on the use of fibrin glue for peripheral nerve repair. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(6):2381-2390. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182131cf5.
18.
SchmidhammerRZandiehSHopfR, et al. Alleviated tension at the repair site enhances functional regeneration: the effect of full range of motion mobilization on the regeneration of peripheral nerves—histologic, electrophysiologic, and functional results in a rat model. J Trauma. 2004;56(3):571-584.
19.
TarlovIM. How long should an extremity be immobilized after nerve suture?Ann Surg. 1947;126(3):366-376.
20.
TempleCLFRossDCDunningCE, et al. Tensile strength of healing peripheral nerves. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2003;19(7):483-488. doi:10.1055/s-2003-44637.
21.
TempleCLFRossDCDunningCE, et al. Resistance to disruption and gapping of peripheral nerve repairs: an in vitro biomechanical assessment of techniques. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2004;20(8):645-650. doi:10.1055/s-2004-861525.
22.
WoodMDKempSWWeberC, et al. Outcome measures of peripheral nerve regeneration. Ann Anat. 2011;193:321-333.
