Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 156, Issue 8, pp 1577–1590 | Cite as

Comparison of a collagen membrane versus a fibrin sealant after a peroneal nerve section and repair: a functional and histological study

  • Vincent Pertici
  • Jérôme Laurin
  • Tanguy Marqueste
  • Patrick Decherchi
Experimental Research - Neurosurgical Techniques

Abstract

Background

To date, fibrin sealant is considered to be one of the most effective substitutes to prevent post-operative fibrosis and to limit neuroma formation after nerve suture. Because fibrin sealant presents a number of drawbacks, more suitable techniques should be considered. The aim of this study was to functionally and histologically compare the efficiency of a fibrin sealant to a resorbable semi-permeable porcine type I collagen membrane after a peroneal nerve lesion and repair on rats.

Methods

Rats were divided into four groups: (1) a SHAM group (n = 10) in which surgery was performed without damaging the nerve, (2) a LESION group (n = 15) in which the nerve was cut and immediately sutured without additional treatment, (3) a MEMBRANE group (n = 30) in which a collagen membrane was wrapped around the lesion site, and (4) a GLUE group (n = 30) in which the peroneal nerve was coated by fibrin sealant. Peroneal Functional Index (PFI), kinematic analysis of locomotion, muscular atrophy, axonal regrowth, and irritant ranking score (IRS) were performed during three months post-surgery.

Results

Our results indicate that at the third month post-surgery, no difference in both the functional recovery and the histological measurement was observed between groups. However, no deleterious effect was observed following the use of the collagen membrane. Indeed, the porcine membrane was well-integrated into the host tissue, with no noticeable foreign body reaction at three months post-surgery.

Conclusion

Our preliminary results highlight the fact that the collagen membrane could be used as an alternative to fibrin sealant in peripheral nerve repair surgery. Indeed, animals in which the collagen membrane was used to wrap the lesion site exhibited similar functional and histological results as animals in which a fibrin sealant was used to coat the lesion. The greatest advantage of this membrane is that it could be used as a drug delivery device, regulated by its degradation rate.

Keywords

Biomaterial Peroneal function index Kinematic analysis Anastomosis Rat 

References

  1. 1.
    Alluin O, Wittmann C, Marqueste T, Chabas JF, Garcia S, Lavaut MN, Guinard D, Feron F, Decherchi P (2009) Functional recovery after peripheral nerve injury and implantation of a collagen guide. Biomaterials 30:363–373PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bain JR, Mackinnon SE, Hunter DA (1989) Functional evaluation of complete sciatic, peroneal, and posterior tibial nerve lesions in the rat. Plast Reconstr Surg 83:129–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bel A, Kachatryan L, Bruneval P, Peyrard S, Gagnieu C, Fabiani JN, Menasche P (2010) A new absorbable collagen membrane to reduce adhesions in cardiac surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 10:213–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dam-Hieu P, Lacroix C, Said G, Devanz P, Liu S, Tadie M (2005) Reduction of postoperative perineural adhesions by Hyaloglide gel: an experimental study in the rat sciatic nerve. Neurosurgery 56:425–433, discussion 425–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Ruiter GC, Spinner RJ, Alaid AO, Koch AJ, Wang H, Malessy MJ, Currier BL, Yaszemski MJ, Kaufman KR, Windebank AJ (2007) Two-dimensional digital video ankle motion analysis for assessment of function in the rat sciatic nerve model. J Peripher Nerv Syst: JPNS 12:216–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dreesmann L, Mittnacht U, Lietz M, Schlosshauer B (2009) Nerve fibroblast impact on Schwann cell behavior. Eur J Cell Biol 88:285–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Forest P, Morfin F, Bergeron E, Dore J, Bensa S, Wittmann C, Picot S, Renaud FN, Freney J, Gagnieu C (2007) Validation of a viral and bacterial inactivation step during the extraction and purification process of porcine collagen. Biomed Mater Eng 17:199–208PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gagnieu CH, Forest PO (2007) In vivo biodegradability and biocompatibility of porcine type I atelocollagen newly crosslinked by oxidized glycogen. Biomed Mater Eng 17:9–18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gao C, Ma S, Ji Y, Wang JE, Li J (2008) Siatic nerve regeneration in rats stimulated by fibrin glue containing nerve growth factor: an experimental study. Injury 39:1414–1420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ide C, Tohyama K, Tajima K, Endoh K, Sano K, Tamura M, Mizoguchi A, Kitada M, Morihara T, Shirasu M (1998) Long acellular nerve transplants for allogeneic grafting and the effects of basic fibroblast growth factor on the growth of regenerating axons in dogs: a preliminary report. Exp Neurol 154:99–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ikeda K, Yamauchi D, Osamura N, Hagiwara N, Tomita K (2003) Hyaluronic acid prevents peripheral nerve adhesion. Br J Plast Surg 56:342–347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Inaloz SS, Ak HE, Vayla V, Akin M, Aslan A, Sari I, Celik Y, Ozkan U (1997) Comparison of microsuturing to the use of tissue adhesives in anastomosing sciatic nerve cuts in rats. Neurosurg Rev 20:250–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jackson MR (2001) Fibrin sealants in surgical practice: an overview. Am J Surg 182:1S–7SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeans LA, Gilchrist T, Healy D (2007) Peripheral nerve repair by means of a flexible biodegradable glass fibre wrap: a comparison with microsurgical epineurial repair. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg: JPRAS 60:1302–1308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanazawa R, Sato S, Iwamoto N, Teramoto A (2010) Allergic reaction following arachnoid plasty with a fibrin sealant. Neurol Med Chir 50:608–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim PD, Hayes A, Amin F, Akelina Y, Hays AP, Rosenwasser MP (2010) Collagen nerve protector in rat sciatic nerve repair: a morphometric and histological analysis. Microsurgery 30:392–396PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marcol W, Larysz-Brysz M, Kucharska M, Niekraszewicz A, Slusarczyk W, Kotulska K, Wlaszczuk P, Wlaszczuk A, Jedrzejowska-Szypulka H, Lewin-Kowalik J (2011) Reduction of post-traumatic neuroma and epineural scar formation in rat sciatic nerve by application of microcrystallic chitosan. Microsurgery 31:642–649PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martins RS, Siqueira MG, Da Silva CF, Plese JP (2005) Overall assessment of regeneration in peripheral nerve lesion repair using fibrin glue, suture, or a combination of the 2 techniques in a rat model. Which is the ideal choice? Surg Neurol 64(Suppl 1):10–16, discussion S11:16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Masmejean E, Schlur C, Chetouani M, Dana C (2011) Evaluation of a new anti-adhesion collagen membrane (Cova™ ORTHO) for upper limb nerve and/or tendon surgery - Preliminary results. e-mémoires de l’Académie Nationale de. Chirurgie 10:33–37Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mathieu L, Adam C, Legagneux J, Bruneval P, Masmejean E (2012) Reduction of neural scarring after peripheral nerve suture: an experimental study about collagen membrane and autologous vein wrapping. Chir Main 31:311–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Matsumoto K, Ohnishi K, Kiyotani T, Sekine T, Ueda H, Nakamura T, Endo K, Shimizu Y (2000) Peripheral nerve regeneration across an 80-mm gap bridged by a polyglycolic acid (PGA)-collagen tube filled with laminin-coated collagen fibers: a histological and electrophysiological evaluation of regenerated nerves. Brain Res 868:315–328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Millesi H, Zoch G, Rath T (1990) The gliding apparatus of peripheral nerve and its clinical significance. Ann Chir Main Memb Super: Organe Off Soc Chir Main Ann Hand Upper Limb Surg 9:87–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ohsumi H, Hirata H, Nagakura T, Tsujii M, Sugimoto T, Miyamoto K, Horiuchi T, Nagao M, Nakashima T, Uchida A (2005) Enhancement of perineurial repair and inhibition of nerve adhesion by viscous injectable pure alginate sol. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:823–830PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ohta M, Komatsu F, Abe H, Sakamoto S, Tsugu H, Oshiro S, Fukushima T (2008) Complication caused by use of fibrin glue in vessel transposition for trigeminal neuralgia. Neurol Med Chir 48:30–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Okui N, Yamamoto M, Fukuhira Y, Kaneko H, Hirata H (2010) Artificial perineurium to enhance nerve recovery from damage after neurolysis. Muscle Nerve 42:570–575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ornelas L, Padilla L, Di Silvio M, Schalch P, Esperante S, Infante RL, Bustamante JC, Avalos P, Varela D, Lopez M (2006) Fibrin glue: an alternative technique for nerve coaptation–Part II. Nerve regeneration and histomorphometric assessment. J Reconstr Microsurg 22:123–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Radosevich M, Goubran HI, Burnouf T (1997) Fibrin sealant: scientific rationale, production methods, properties, and current clinical use. Vox Sang 72:133–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sameem M, Wood TJ, Bain JR (2011) A systematic review on the use of fibrin glue for peripheral nerve repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:2381–2390PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Santos PM, Williams SL, Thomas SS (1995) Neuromuscular evaluation using rat gait analysis. J Neurosci Methods 61:79–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shaffer SW, Harrison AL (2007) Aging of the somatosensory system: a translational perspective. Phys Ther 87:193–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Spicer PP, Mikos AG (2010) Fibrin glue as a drug delivery system. J Control Release: Off J Control Release Soc 148:49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vleggeert-Lankamp CL (2007) The role of evaluation methods in the assessment of peripheral nerve regeneration through synthetic conduits: a systematic review. Lab Investig J Neurosurg 107:1168–1189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Xu J, Varitimidis SE, Fisher KJ, Tomaino MM, Sotereanos DG (2000) The effect of wrapping scarred nerves with autogenous vein graft to treat recurrent chronic nerve compression. J Hand Surg 25:93–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincent Pertici
    • 1
  • Jérôme Laurin
    • 1
  • Tanguy Marqueste
    • 1
  • Patrick Decherchi
    • 1
  1. 1.Aix-Marseille Université (AMU) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), UMR 7287 « Institut des Sciences du Mouvement (ISM) : Etienne-Jules MAREY », Equipe « Plasticité des Systèmes Nerveux et Musculaire », Parc Scientifique et Technologique de LuminyFaculté des Sciences du Sport de MarseilleMarseilleFrance

Personalised recommendations