Telemedicine and digital management in repair and regeneration after nerve injury and in nervous system diseases

To the editor, We read with interest the article, ＂Facilitating transparency in spinal cord injury studies using data standards and ontol- ogles＂ by Professor Vance E Lemmon, University of Miami, USA （Lemmon et al., 2014） and would like to add to the discussion on digital management in spinal cord injury. We have analyzed the advancements in the treatment of spinal cord injury, traumatic brain jury. Encouraging outcomes injury and peripheral nerve in- have been achieved in the area of regulating axon growth in vivo and in vitro. However, such a large amount of information neither provides in-depth insight for other scholars nor provides detailed therapeutic nrotocols for clinical studies.

Does crossover innervation really affect the clinical outcome？ A comparison of outcome between unilateral and bilateral digital nerve repair

Digital nerve injuries are the mostly detected nerve injury in the upper extremity. However, since the clinical phenomenon of crossover innervation at some degree from uninjured digital nerve to the in- jured side occurs after digital nerve injuries is sustained, one could argue that this concept might even result in the overestimation of the outcome of the digital nerve repair. With this knowledge in mind, this study aimed to present novel, pure, focused and valuable clinical data by comparing the outcomes of bilateral and unilateral digital nerve repair. A retrospective review of 28 fingers with unilateral or bilateral digital nerve repair using end-to-end technique in 19 patients within 2 years was performed. Weber＇s two-point discrimination, sharp/dull discrimination, warm/cold sensation and Visual Analog Scale scoring were measured at final 12-month follow ups in all patients. There was no significant difference in recovery of sensibility after unilateral and bilateral digital nerve repairs. Though there is crossover innervation microscopically, it is not important in the clinical evaluation period. According to clinical findings from this study, crossover innervations appear to be negligible in the estimation of outcomes of digital neurorrhaphy.

One-stage human acellular nerve allograft reconstruction for digital nerve defects

Human acellular nerve allografts have a wide range of donor origin and can effectively avoid nerve injury in the donor area. Very little is known about one-stage reconstruction of digital nerve defects. The present study observed the feasibility and effectiveness of human acellular nerve allograft in the reconstruction of 〈 5-cm digital nerve defects within 6 hours after injury. A total of 15 cases of nerve injury, combined with nerve defects in 18 digits from the Department of Emergency were enrolled in this study. After dehridement, digital nerves were reconstructed using human acellular nerve allografts. The patients were followed up for 6-24 months after reconstruction. Mackinnon-Dellon static two-point discrimination results showed excellent and good rates of 89%. Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test demonstrated that light touch was normal, with an obvious improvement rate of 78%. These findings confirmed that human acellular nerve allograft for one-stage reconstruction of digital nerve defect after hand injury is feasible, which provides a novel trend for peripheral nerve reconstruction.

Influence of immobilization and sensory re-education on the sensory recovery after reconstruction of digital nerves with direct suture or muscle-in-vein conduits

The influence of duration of immobilization and postoperative sensory re-education on the final outcome after reconstruction of digital nerves with direct suture or muscle-in-vein conduits was investigated. The final sensory outcome of 35 patients with 41 digital nerve injuries, who either underwent a direct suture（DS） or a nerve reconstruction with muscle-in-vein conduits（MVC）, was assessed the earliest 12 months postoperatively using static and moving two-point discrimination as well as Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. There was no significant difference in sensory recovery in cases with an immobilization of 3–7 days versus 10 days in the DS or MVC group. Moreover, no statistically significant difference in sensory recovery was found in cases receiving postoperative sensory re-education versus those not receiving in the DS or MVC group. An early mobilization does not seem to have a negative impact on the final outcome after digital nerve reconstruction. The effect of sensory re-education after digital nerve reconstruction should be reconsidered.

Comparison of short- with long-term regeneration results after digital nerve reconstruction with musclein-vein conduits

Muscle-in-vein conduits are used alternatively to nerve grafts for bridging nerve defects. The purpose of this study was to examine short- and long-term regeneration results after digital nerve reconstruction with muscle-in-vein conduits. Static and moving two-point discriminations and Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments were used to evaluate sensory recovery 6–12 months and 14–35 months after repair of digital nerves with muscle-in-vein in 7 cases. Both follow-ups were performed after clinical signs of progressing regeneration disappeared. In 4 of 7 cases, a further recovery of both two-point discriminations and in another case of only the static two-point discrimination of 1–3 mm could be found between the short-term and long-term follow-up examination. Moreover, a late recovery of both two-point discriminations was demonstrated in another case. Four of 7 cases showed a sensory improvement by one Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments. This pilot study suggests that sensory recovery still takes place even when clinical signs of progressing regeneration disappear.