{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04455445544554455, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04667609618104668, 'mean_word_length': 4.592885375494071, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 4, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The influence of nerve conduits diameter in motor nerve recovery after segmental nerve repair

Many conduits have demonstrated potential to substitute nerve autografts; however, the influence of conduit inner diameter (ID) has never been studied as a separate parameter. This experimental study compared motor recovery after segmental nerve repair with two different ID collagen conduits: 1.5 and 2.0 mm. In addition, the conduits were analyzed in vitro to determine the variations of ID before and after hydration. Thirty rats were divided into three groups: 2.0 mm ID, 1.5 mm ID, and a control group autograft. After 12 weeks, the 1.5 mm ID group demonstrated significant increase in force (P < 0.0001) and weight (P < 0.0001) of the tibialis anterior muscle and better histomorphometry results of the peroneal nerve (P < 0.05) compared to 2.0 mm ID group; nevertheless, autograft results outperformed both conduits (P < 0.0001). Conduits ID were somewhat smaller than advertised, measuring 1.59 ± 0.03 mm and 1.25 ± 0.0 mm. Only the larger conduit showed a 6% increase in ID after hydration, changing to 1.69 ± 0.02 mm. Although autografts perform best, an improvement in motor recovery can be achieved with collagen conduits when a better size match conduit is being used. Minimal changes in collagen conduits ID can be expected after implantation. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 34:646–652, 2014.