Comparison of nylon, vicryl, and fibrin glue for nerve grafting in rats

ABSTRACT

Objectives

For nerve injuries, not amendable to tensionless epineural coaptation of the nerve, autografts are the preferred treatment. Although absorbable sutures are not recommended for nerve repair, there is no evidence that non-absorbable sutures are superior to absorbable sutures. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of non-absorbable monofilament nylon sutures, absorbable monofilament vicryl sutures, and fibrin glue when used for nerve grafting.

Methods

Lewis rats (N = 32) were subjected to a sciatic nerve transection and randomly assigned to a group: graft with Nylon, graft with Vicryl, graft with Fibrin Glue, or no graft. Motor function, sensory function, and thermal pain were assessed during a 12-week recovery period, and immunohistochemistry was used to assess macrophage response.

Results

At 12 weeks, the Vicryl and Nylon groups had significantly larger ankle angles at to lift off, which is a measure of motor function, compared to injured controls (p < 0.05). Grafted rats displayed no difference in thermal response but hypersensitivity to mechanical stimuli compared to the uninjured hindlimb. The Nylon, Vicryl, and Fibrin Glue groups all had significantly less atrophy of the gastrocnemius muscle compared to injured controls (p < 0.0001). In the Fibrin Glue group, 3/9 grafts did not incorporate. The Nylon group had significantly less (p = 0.0004) axon growth surrounding the suture holes compared to the Vicryl group. There were no differences in the axon counts, motor neurons, or sensory neurons between all grafted rats.

Conclusions

These results demonstrate that vicryl sutures work just as well as nylon for nerve recovery after injury and grafting.

KEYWORDS:

• Axonal regeneration
• fibrin glue
• nerve grafting
• nerve repair
• nylon
• vicryl

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Surgery Histology Core Lab, Dr. Susan Thibeault PhD, CCC-SLP, PI of the DOS Histology Core, along with certified Histotechnologist Sierra Raglin, HTL (ASCP) CMP, and Lab Technician Rebecca Lyons-Oelze for their help with tissue processing and immunohistochemistry.

Disclosure statement

All original data, statistical analyses, and any additional method details are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.

Authors’ contributions

All authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. ASH and DJH contributed to the study concept and design. ASH, EJM, AHO, MAT, MCB, JWS, TLM, RRM, JRH, ANJ, ELO, NRM, JMJ, and DJH contributed to the acquisition of data. ASH, EJM, MCB, RRM, ANJ, NRM, and DJH contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data. ASH, EJM, MCB, JWS, PKA, ANJ, NRM, and DJH contributed to the drafting of the manuscript and critical revision of the article. DJH and ASH contributed to the statistical analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Consent for publication

All authors provide consent for the publication of the manuscript detailed above, including any accompanying images or data contained within the manuscript.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.2024.2376307