Comparison of nerve conduits and nerve graft in digital nerve regeneration: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare nerve conduits and nerve graft for peripheral nerve regeneration. This type of lesion frequently causes disability due to pain, paresthesia and motor deficit. On the PICO process, P corresponded to patients with peripheral digital nerve lesions of any age, gender or ethnicity, I to interventions with nerve conduits or nerve graft, C to the control group with no treatment, placebo or receiving other treatment, and O to outcome assessment of nerve regeneration. Initial search found in 3859 studies, including 2001 duplicates. The remaining 1858 studies were selected by title and/or abstract; 1798 articles were excluded, leaving 60 articles for full-text review. Thirty-nine of these 60 reports were excluded as not meeting our inclusion criteria, and 21 articles were ultimately included in the systematic review. For patients older than 40 years, there was a greater mean improvement on S2PD and M2PD tests with grafting, which seemed to be the better surgical technique, positively impacting prognosis. On the M2PD test, there was significantly greater improvement in 11-17.99 mm defects with grafting (P < 0.001); this finding should guide surgical strategy in peripheral nerve regeneration, to ensure better outcomes. (C) 2021 SFCM. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This study compared nerve conduits and nerve grafts for peripheral nerve regeneration, and found that in patients over 40 years old, nerve grafting seemed to have a better effect on improving sensation and motor function.