Volume 11, Issue 2 (2022)                   WJPS 2022, 11(2): 90-94 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shahraki S S, Yavari M, Tabrizi A. Effect of Amniotic Membrane Nerve Wrapping in Final Results of Traumatic Peripheral Nerve Repair. WJPS 2022; 11 (2) :90-94
URL: http://wjps.ir/article-1-906-en.html
1- 1. Department of Plastic Surgery, Panzdahe Khordad Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. Tehran, Iran.
2- 2. Department of Hand and Microsurgery, Panzdahe Khordad Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran Iran.
3- 3. School of Medicine. Panzdahe Khordad Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract:   (1686 Views)
Preventing perineural adhesions and scars formation in the traumatic peripheral injuries is very important on the recovery process. We aimed to evaluate the effect of using the amniotic membrane wrapping on the results of surgical treatment of damaged peripheral nerves.
This cohort study included 30 patients with symptoms of acute peripheral nerve injuries due to penetrating trauma in the forearm or wrist in January 2019 to November 2020 referred to the Hand and Microsurgery Department, 15 Khordad Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. In 15 patients, after nerve repair, amniotic membrane coverage was used around the nerve, all patients were followed for 12 months. Ultrasound study for neuroma formation and nerve regeneration was determined based on EMG and NCV findings. The modified Medical Research Councile classification (MRCC) was used to evaluate of motor and sensory recovery.
In the amniotic membrane wrapping group, all patients had nerve regeneration and functional nerve recovery occurred after 12 months. In the control group, 5 patients (33.4%) did not have nerve recovery and had functional and sensory impairment. In terms of functional capabilities; there was a significant difference in pinch strength, grip power and MRCC scoring between the two groups. Moreover, the mean volume of neuroma in these patients who used amniotic membrane covering was 2.7 mm3 and in the control group, it was 3.9 mm3 (P=0.001). Five patients who did not have a damaged nerve, the neuroma volume was 4.8 ± 0.9 mm3.
The use of amniotic membrane covering is effective methods in the improve results of peripheral nerve repair and nerve function recovery.
Full-Text [PDF 536 kb]   (928 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Special
ePublished: 2022/07/30

1. Joshi P, Dutta S, Chaturvedi P, Nair S. Head and neck cancers in developing countries. Rambam Maimonides Med J 2014;5(2): :e0009. [DOI:10.5041/RMMJ.10143] [PMID] [PMCID]
4. Garajei A, Arabkheradmand A, Motamedi MHK, Pazoki AE, Rashad A. Reconstruction of the Face Following Cancer Ablation. A Textbook of Advanced Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Volume 2: Intech Open; 2015. [DOI:10.5772/59746] [PMID]
7. Alfouzan AF. Review of surgical resection and reconstruction in head and neck cancer: Traditional versus current concepts. Saudi Med J 2018;39(10):971-80. [DOI:10.15537/smj.2018.10.22887] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Chakrabarti S, Chakrabarti PR, Desai SM, Agrawal D, Mehta DY, Pancholi M. Reconstruction in oral malignancy: Factors affecting morbidity of various procedures. Ann Maxillofac Surgy 2015;5(2):191-7. [DOI:10.4103/2231-0746.175748] [PMID] [PMCID]
13. Squaquara R, Evans KFK, di Spilimbergo SS, Mardini S, editors. Intraoral reconstruction using local and regional flaps. Seminars in plastic surgery; 2010: © Thieme Medical Publishers. [DOI:10.1055/s-0030-1255337] [PMID] [PMCID]
16. Tripathi M, Parshad S, Karwasra RK, Singh V. Pectoralis major myocutaneous flap in head and neck reconstruction: An experience in 100 consecutive cases. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 2015; 6(1):37-41. [DOI:10.4103/0975-5950.168225] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Leite A, De Matos L, Belli M, Kulcsar M, Cernea C, Brandao LG, et al. Pectoralis major myocutaneous flap for head and neck reconstruction: risk factors for fistula formation. Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica 2014;34(6):389-93.
20. Ariyan S. The pectoralis major myocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 1979;63(1):73-81. [DOI:10.1097/00006534-197901000-00012] [PMID]
23. Kekatpure V, Trivedi N, Manjula B, Mohan AM, Shetkar G, Kuriakose M. Pectoralis major flap for head and neck reconstruction in era of free flaps. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;41(4):453-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2011.12.029] [PMID]
26. Thankappan K, Iyer S, Rajapurkar M, Sharma M, Subash P. Flap hitching technique to the teeth after oral cancer resection. J Surg Tech Case Rep 2012;4(1):19-21. [DOI:10.4103/2006-8808.100347] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. Chaudhary R, Akhtar MS, Bariar LM, Khurram MF. Use of pectoralis major myocutaneous flap for resurfacing the soft tissue defects of head and neck. Journal of Orofacial Sciences 2014;6(2):88. [DOI:10.4103/0975-8844.143046]
31. Tripathi M, Parshad SM, Kumar Karwasra R, Singh V. Pectoralis Major Myocutaneous Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction: An Experience in 100 Consecutive Cases. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 6(1): 37-41. [DOI:10.4103/0975-5950.168225] [PMID] [PMCID]
34. Venkatesh A, Punit S Dikhit, Nagraj N, Jayade B, Kumar N. PMMC flap revisited and its clinical outcome in 150 patients. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 19(1):26-31. [DOI:10.1007/s12663-019-01228-7] [PMID] [PMCID]
37. You YS, Chung CH, Chang YJ, Kim KH, Jung SW, Rho YS. Analysis of 120 pectoralis major flaps for head and neck reconstruction. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39(5):522-27. [DOI:10.5999/aps.2012.39.5.522] [PMID] [PMCID]
40. Kolokythas A. Long-term surgical complications in the oral cancer patient: a comprehensive review. Part II. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2010;1(3):e2. [DOI:10.5037/jomr.2010.1302]
42. Balakrishnan C, Narasimhan K, Gursel T, Jackson O, Schaffner A. Closure of orocutanous fistula using a pedicled expanded deltopectoral flap. Can J Plast Surg 2008;16(3):178-80. https://doi.org/10.4172/plastic-surgery.1000568 [DOI:10.1177/229255030801600305] [PMID] [PMCID]
46. Prateek J, Kapila M, Dipanwita R et al. Factors affecting post-operative removal of nasogastric tube and tracheostomy tube in oral cancer: a retrospective analysis of 234 cases. Oral Cancer August 2018;2(3-4). [DOI:10.1007/s41548-018-0011-2]
48. Giullanno Molina de Melo, Karina de Cassia Braga Ribeiro et al. Risk factors for post-operative complications in Oral Cancer and their prognostic implications. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001;127:828-833.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2023 CC BY-NC 4.0 | World Journal of Plastic Surgery

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb