Peripheral Nerve Tissue Engineering and Regeneration 2020
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-06217-0_11-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Clinical Outcome Measures Following Peripheral Nerve Repair

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 175 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The development of responsive outcome measures is critical in the context of clinical nerve repair research. Successful clinical translation of novel regenerative therapies will likely depend on the ability of outcome measures to capture small incremental changes over time 31 . Conventional clinical metrics such as MRC grading are not sufficiently sensitive to the biological process of muscle reinnervation and therefore limit the design of clinical trials of therapies which hope to enhance nerve repair [31][32][33] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The development of responsive outcome measures is critical in the context of clinical nerve repair research. Successful clinical translation of novel regenerative therapies will likely depend on the ability of outcome measures to capture small incremental changes over time 31 . Conventional clinical metrics such as MRC grading are not sufficiently sensitive to the biological process of muscle reinnervation and therefore limit the design of clinical trials of therapies which hope to enhance nerve repair [31][32][33] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Clinical diagnostic tools such as electromyography (EMG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis have emerged as the mainstay investigations to detect and monitor severe nerve injury 13–15 . However, they are expensive to perform and difficult to interpret 15,16 without input from highly trained specialised clinicians. In many cases, it is not possible to delineate between different severities of nerve injury using these tests 5 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Serum NfL assays are also significantly cheaper, less invasive and easier to interpret than EMG and MRI 18 . Studies which link NfL assays to a volume of axonal injury could form the basis for an improved quantitative classification system of nerve injury severity that has the power to inform clinical management at an earlier stage post‐injury than is currently possible with conventional technologies 15,23 . Data which characterise: (1) the serum NfL signal seen following different severities of nerve trauma and (2) the time course of serum NfL changes after nerve injury will provide essential information that will inform the clinical utility of serum NfL in the context of nerve trauma.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Measuring efficacy has traditionally been a problematic issue because nerve injuries are diverse in nature, rarely exist in isolation, and measurable outcomes are often slow and subjective. Recent advances have improved clinical trial approaches for peripheral nerve interventions, providing opportunities to evaluate EngNT and other new therapies in a robust objective manner over an acceptable time frame [12,[41][42][43][44]. Consequently, opportunities exist for early clinical evaluation of EngNT to be conducted in patients with digital nerve injuries, or at the donor site in patients undergoing autografting.…”
Section: Commercialisation and Clinical Translationmentioning
confidence: 99%