4.2 Article

Local Polyethylene Glycol in Combination with Chitosan Based Hybrid Nanofiber Conduit Accelerates Transected Peripheral Nerve Regeneration

Journal

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE SURGERY
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 167-174

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/08941939.2015.1098758

Keywords

peripheral nerve repair; sciatic; polyethylene glycol; chitosan based hybrid nanofiber; local

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The incapability to promptly improve behavioral function after discontinuation of peripheral nerves is a current problem in clinical practice. Effect of local polyethylene glycol in combination with chitosan-based hybrid nanofiber conduitwas assessed. Study Design: A 10-mm sciatic nerve defect was bridged using a chitosan-based hybrid nanofiber conduit (Chitosan) filled with phosphate-buffered saline. In authograft group (AUTO), a segment of sciatic nerve was transected and reimplanted reversely. In polyethylene glycol-treated group (CHIT/PEG), the conduit was filled with polyethylene glycol solution. The regenerated fibers were studied within 12 weeks after surgery. Results: The behavioral and functional tests confirmed faster recovery of the regenerated axons in PEG-treated group compared to Chitosan group (p<.05). The mean ratios of gastrocnemius muscles weight were measured. There was statistically significant difference between the muscle weight ratios of CHIT/PEG and Chitosan groups (p<.05). Morphometric indices of regenerated fibers showed number and diameter of the myelinated fibers were significantly higher in CHIT/PEG than in Chitosan. In immuohistochemistry, the location of reactions to S-100 in CHIT/PEG was clearly more positive than Chitosan group. Conclusion: polyethylene glycol solution when loaded in a chitosan-based hybrid nanofiber conduit resulted in acceleration of functional recovery and quantitative morphometric indices of sciatic nerve.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available