Stem cell, Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor and/or Dihexa to promote limb function recovery in a rat sciatic nerve damage-repair model: Experimental animal studies.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing nerve regeneration and re-innervation of target muscle/s is the key for improved functional recovery following peripheral nerve damage. We investigated whether administration of mesenchymal stem cell (MSC), Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) and/or Dihexa can improve recovery of limb function following peripheral nerve damage in rat sciatic nerve transection-repair model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: There were 10 experimental groups (n = 6-8 rats/group). Bone marrow derived syngeneic MSCs (2 × 106; passage≤6), G-CSF (200-400 µg/kg b.wt.), Dihexa (2-4 mg/kg b.wt.) and/or Vehicle were administered to male Lewis rats locally via hydrogel at the site of nerve repair, systemically (i.v./i.p), and/or to gastrocnemius muscle. The limb sensory and motor functions were assessed at 1-2 week intervals post nerve repair until the study endpoint (16 weeks). RESULTS: The sensory function in all nerve boundaries (peroneal, tibial, sural) returned to nearly normal by 8 weeks (Grade 2.7 on a scale of Grade 0-3 [0 = No function; 3 = Normal function]) in all groups combined. The peroneal nerve function recovered quickly with return of function at one week (∼2.0) while sural nerve function recovered rather slowly at four weeks (∼1.0). Motor function at 8-16 weeks post-nerve repair as determined by walking foot print grades significantly (P < 0.05) improved with MSC + G-CSF or MSC + Dihexa administrations into gastrocnemius muscle and mitigated foot flexion contractures. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate MSC, G-CSF and Dihexa are promising candidates for adjunct therapies to promote limb functional recovery after surgical nerve repair, and have implications in peripheral nerve injury and limb transplantation. IACUC No.215064.

Silver-coated nylon dressing plus active DC microcurrent for healing of autogenous skin donor sites.

INTRODUCTION: Burn wounds are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, and improved outcomes are demonstrated with early closure of both primary burn wounds and skin donor sites. Thus, technology that decreases the healing time of burns and donor sites would be potentially lifesaving. We present the results of a single-center, prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of silver-coated dressing with active microcurrent in comparison to silver-coated dressing with sham microcurrent on wound-closure time for autogenous skin donor sites. METHODS: Four hundred five patients were screened for treatment of their donor sites using a silver-coated nylon dressing with either sham or active microcurrent stimulation. Thirty patients were enrolled in the study and then randomized. Of these, 5 patients were removed from analysis due to protocol deviations. Differences in time-to-closure were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the proportional hazard regression model. Subjective verbal pain rating scores (0-10; 0, no pain; 10, worst pain) were also recorded. All devices were blinded and programmed at an outside facility, so that every patient had either an active or sham device. The study was unblinded only after the final patient's donor site had healed. All patients achieved donor-site healing before postoperative day 20. The 14 patients in the active microcurrent group [mean, 10.8 (2.9) days; range, 7-15 days] experienced no difference in time to wound healing as compared to the remaining patients in the sham microcurrent group [mean, 11.1 (2.0) days; range, 8-14 days; P = 0.75]. There were no differences in pain from one group compared to the other. None of the donor sites exhibited clinical signs of infection. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample size of 25 burn patients, the addition of direct microcurrent to silver-nylon dressings did not decrease time to wound closure of skin donor sites, and it did not show a difference in reported pain levels.

Novel surgical technique for full face transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Full face transplantation raises a new set of ethical concerns and technical difficulties when compared with partial face transplantation. Previously, it was thought that full face allografts must include bilateral superficial temporal and facial arteries, dictating the need for inclusion of donor parotid glands. This would lead to poor aesthetic outcomes and limit facial nerve coaptation to the level of the main trunk, which often results in synkinesias. The authors present a new approach to full facial allograft recovery based on blood supply from facial arteries alone. This approach eliminates the need to include parotid glands, enabling more distal coaptation of facial nerve branches and targeted innervation of effector muscles. The recovery can be reproducibly performed within 4 hours. METHODS: Three mock cadaver dissections and three full face transplantations were performed. RESULTS: Donor facial allografts were dissected in cranio-caudal and lateral-to-medial fashion. Individual facial nerve branches were cut medial to parotid glands and coapted to corresponding recipient nerve branches. With the exception of one parotid gland used to add bulk, parotids were generally not included in the allografts. Relevant sensory nerves were coapted. External carotid arteries were dissected, leaving only bilateral facial arteries as the primary arterial supply. All full facial allografts were well perfused immediately following transplantation and are surviving. CONCLUSIONS: The authors describe a new, simple, and reproducible technique of full facial allograft recovery that allows perfusion using only bilateral facial arteries. Their technique follows critical principles of targeted sensory and motor nerve coaptation.