Comparison of Nerve Repair with End to End, End to Side with Window and End to Side without Window Methods in Lower Extremity of Rat

Introduction & Despite different studies on end-to-side nerve repair, the results are controversial. The importance of end-to-side method is that, it is very useful in cases that proximal nerve is not available and also in this method, the donor’s nerves remain intact and without injury. Finally comparison to other classic procedures, end-to-side repair need less time and less dissection. The majority of studies only evaluated nerve recovery by non functional or functional parameters. As it has been proven, the results of functional and non functional studies are not always matched. This study was designed to evaluate this method by both functional (SFI) and non-functional parameters (histochemical study). In this study, the 40 rats were randomly classified in to 4 groups of 10 rats: 1- control group (n=10) in which the nerve was exposed and cut and implanted onto adductor muscles, 2- end-to-end anastomosis (n=10) in which peroneal nerve cut and two segment were anastomosed end-to-end, 3- end-to-side anastomosis with window (n=10) in which peroneal nerve was cut and anastomosed with window to tibial nerve, 4- end-to-side anastomosis without window (n=10) in which that peroneal nerve was cut and anastomosed without window to tibial nerve. After the 1th, 8th, 16th week functional (PFI) and non functional (histological) studies were performed and the results were compared. The axon count was analyzed by the statistical tests any way Anova and paired sample t-test and were checked by post Hoc Tukye’s test. The data from FSI test were checked with data from repeated tests. Danet test was also used for the confirmation of the data. In all experimental groups (group 2,3,4) motor recovery (SFI) at 8th, and 16th week were not statisticaly different (P >0.05). In histological study axon count in end -to-side with window anastomosis were higher than other experimental groups (P