PURPOSE: The optimal management of a nerve gap within the fingers remains an unanswered question in hand surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the sensory recovery, cost, and complication profile of digital nerve repair using autogenous vein and @entity6886 conduits. METHODS: We enrolled @entity1 undergoing repair of @entity128 with gaps precluding primary repair. The minimum gap that was found to preclude primary repair was 4 mm. Each nerve repair was randomized to the type of nerve repair with either a woven @entity6886 conduit or autogenous vein. Time required for repair was recorded. We performed sensory testing, consisting of static and moving 2-point discrimination, at 6 and 12 months after repair. We compared @entity1 factors between the 2 groups using chi-square and Student's t-test. We compared sensory recovery between the 2 groups at each time point using Student's t-test and compared time and cost of repair. RESULTS: We enrolled 42 @entity1 with 76 nerve repairs. Of these, 37 @entity1 (representing 68 repairs) underwent sensory evaluation at the 6-month time point. The median age in this group was 35 years. We repaired 36 nerves with synthetic conduit and 32 with vein. Nerve gaps ranged from 4 to 25 mm (mean, 10 mm). Study groups were not significantly different regarding age, time to repair, gap length, medical history, smoking history, or @entity1538 status. Time to harvest the vein was longer but the average cost of materials and surgery in the vein group was  1,220, compared with  1,269 for synthetic conduit repairs. These differences were not statistically significant. Mean static and moving 2-point discrimination at 6 months for the synthetic conduit group were 8.3    2.0 and 6.6    2.3, respectively, compared with 8.5    1.8 and 7.1    2.2 for the vein group. Values at 12 months for the synthetic conduit group were 7.5    1.9 and 5.6    2.2, compared with 7.6    2.6 and 6.6    2.9 for the vein group. These differences were not statistically significant. Smokers and @entity1538 @entity1 had a worse sensory recovery at 12 months postrepair. There were 2 extrusions in the synthetic conduit group requiring reoperation; however, the difference in extrusion rate was not found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Sensory recovery after digital nerve reconstruction with autogenous vein conduit was equivalent to that using @entity6886 conduit, with a similar cost profile and fewer @entity260 .

A prospective randomized study comparing woven XXXX and autogenous vein conduits for reconstruction of digital nerve gaps.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients', 'patient'] @entity1538 :: ('MESH:D005902', 'Disease') :: ["worker's compensation"] @entity128 :: ('MESH:D020209', 'Disease') :: ['digital nerve injuries'] @entity260 :: ('MESH:D011183', 'Disease') :: ['postoperative complications'] @entity6886 :: ('CHEBI:53492', 'Chemical') :: ['polyglycolic acid']
@entity6886 :: (CHEBI:53492,Chemical) :: ['polyglycolic acid']
