Efficiency of peripheral nerve gaps restoration by different types of tissue engineering constructs according to electromyography: experimental study
Keywords:peripheral nerve injury, autoneuroplasty, tissue engineering, collagen matrix, neural crest derived multipotent stem cells, electromyography
Objective. To investigate the effect of neural crest-derived multipotent stem cells (NC-MSCs) on the restoration of the peripheral nerve function according to the EMG.
Materials and methods. Experimental animals: white outbreed male rats (5.5 months, 250±50 g, vivarium Romodanov Neurosurgery Institute n=52); groups: group 1 – nerve transection (with a 1 cm gap) and immediate autoplasty (n=14); group 2 – nerve transection and immediate plastic with collagen tube filled with fibrin gel (n=15); group 3 – nerve transection and immediate plastic with collagen tube filled with fibrin gel containing NC-MSCs (n=16); group 4 – sham operated animals (n=7). The key EMG parameters were determined using direct stimulation EMG at the 4th and 8th weeks of the experiment.
Results. As at the end of the 4th week of observation in group 1, the amplitude of the M-response of the experimental limb was significantly (p=0.018) inferior to the value of the intact limb (3.3±0.5 mV versus 16.5±2.3 mV). In groups 2 and 3, statistically significant (p=0.018) values of the intact limb were observed for the amplitude of the M-response (group 2 – 16.5±2.3 mV versus 0.9±0.2 mV, group 3 – 14.7±2.2 mV versus 2.3±0.2 mV, p=0.018) and the conduction velocity (group 2 – 22.3±1.6 m/s versus 7.9±2.1 m/s (p=0.018; Mann – Whitney U test); group 3 – 19.3±2.5 m/s versus 12.7±0.4 m/s (p=0.049; Mann – Whitney U test). The value of the amplitude of the M-response in group 2 (0.9±0.2 mV) was significantly lower than that of group 1 (3.3±0.5 mV; p=0.006), group 3 (2.3±0, 2 mV; p=0.002) and group 4 (16.6±1.4 mV; p=0.006). As at the 8th week of observation, there was a significant advantage of the M-response amplitude of the experimental limb of animals in group 1 (4.1±0.7 mV) only above the value in group 2 (1.4±0.3 mV; p=0.007).
Conclusions. NC-MSCs has a positive effect on the regeneration of PN due to stimulation of growth a greater number of nerve fibers than with implantation of a collagen matrix without NC-MSCs, which indirectly reflects key EMG indicators.
1. Torres RY, Miranda GE. Epidemiology of Traumatic Peripheral Nerve Injuries Evaluated by Electrodiagnostic Studies in a Tertiary Care Hospital Clinic. Bol Asoc Med P R. 2015 Jul-Sep;107(3):79-84. [PubMed]
2. Puzović V, Samardzić M, Jovanović M, Zivković B, Savić A, Rasulić L. Etiology and mechanisms of ulnar and median forearm nerve injuries. Vojnosanitetski pregled. 2015 Nov; 72(11):961-7. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Tsymbalyuk VI, Chebotaryova LL, Dubyna GI. Electrophysiological diagnostics of the closed injury brachial plexus in a combination with craniocereberal trauma. Ukrainian Neurosurgical Journal. 2004;(4):65-8. Ukrainian.
4. Zozulya YuА, Tretyak IB, Tsymbalyuk YuV, Sapon NA. [Restorative surgery with invasive nerve stimulation in brachial plexus injuries]. Ukrainian Neurosurgical Journal. 2013;(2):19–22. Ukrainian. [Abstract/Full Text]
5. Rasulić L, Puzović V, Rotim K, Jovanović M, Samardћić M, Ћivković B, Savić A. The epidemiology of forearm nerve injuries - a retrospective study. Acta clinica Croatica. 2015 Mar; 54(1):19-24. [PubMed]
6. Brooks DN, Weber RV, Chao JD, Rinker BD, Zoldos J, Robichaux MR, Ruggeri SB, Anderson KA, Bonatz EE, Wisotsky SM, Cho MS, Wilson C, Cooper EO, Ingari JV, Safa B, Parrett BM, Buncke GM. Processed nerve allografts for peripheral nerve reconstruction: a multicenter study of utilization and outcomes in sensory, mixed, and motor nerve reconstructions. Microsurgery. 2012 Jan;32(1):1-14. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Pabari A, Yang SY, Seifalian AM, Mosahebi A. Modern surgical management of peripheral nerve gap. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery. 2010 Dec; 63(12): 1941-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Korus L, Ross DC, Doherty CD, Miller TA. Nerve transfers and neurotization in peripheral nerve injury, from surgery to rehabilitation. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 2016 Feb; 87(2): 188-197. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Sullivan R, Dailey T, Duncan K, Abel N, Borlongan CV. Peripheral nerve injury: Stem cell therapy and peripheral nerve transfer. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2016 Dec 14;17(12). pii: E2101. Review. [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
13. Morrison SJ, White PM, Zock C, Anderson DJ. Prospective identification, isolation by flow cytometry, and in vivo self-renewal of multipotent mammalian neural crest stem cells. Cell. 1999 Mar 5; 96(5): 737-49. [PubMed]
17. Whitfield TT. Development of the inner ear. Current Opinion in Genetic Development. 2015 Jun; 32: 112-8. [CrossRef]
18. Lindsay SL, Barnett SC. Are nestin-positive mesenchymal stromal cells a better source of cells for CNS repair? Neurochemistry International. 2017 Jun;106: 101-107. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
19. Neirinckx V, Cantinieaux D, Coste C, Rogister B, Franzen R, Wislet-Gendebien S. Concise review: Spinal cord injuries: how could adult mesenchymal and neural crest stem cells take up the challenge? Stem Cells. 2014 Apr;32(4):829-43. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Vasyliev RG, Rodnichenko AE, Shamalo SN, Demidchouk AS, Labunets IF, Chaikovskii YB, Butenko GM. Effects of neural crest-derived multipotent stem cells on regeneration of an injured peripheral nerve in mice. Neurophysiology. 2015;47(1):80-83. [CrossRef]
21. Amoh Y, Aki R, Hamada Y, Niiyama S, Eshima K, Kawahara K, Sato Y, Tani Y, Hoffman RM, Katsuoka K. Nestin-positive hair follicle pluripotent stem cells can promote regeneration of impinged peripheral nerve injury. J Dermatol. 2012 Jan;39(1):33-8. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Najafzadeh N, Esmaeilzade B, Dastan Imcheh M. Hair follicle stem cells: In vitro and in vivo neural differentiation. World Journal of Stem Cells. 2015 Jun 26; 7(5) :866-72. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
24. Fairbairn NG, Meppelink AM, Ng-Glazier J, Randolph MA, Winograd JM. Augmenting peripheral nerve regeneration using stem cells: A review of current opinion. World J Stem Cells. 2015 Jan 26;7(1):11-26. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2017 Vitaliy I. Tsymbaliuk, Taras I. Petriv, Volodymyr V. Medvediev, Mikhail M. Tatarchuk, Natalya G. Draguntsova, Roman G. Vasyliev
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Ukrainian Neurosurgical Journal abides by the CREATIVE COMMONS copyright rights and permissions for open access journals.
Authors, who are published in this Journal, agree to the following conditions:
1. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the Journal under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this Journal.
2. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form of which it has been published by the Journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the Journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this Journal is included.