Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorBulut, Tugrul
dc.contributor.authorAkgun, Ulas
dc.contributor.authorCitlak, Atilla
dc.contributor.authorAslan, Cihan
dc.contributor.authorSener, Ufuk
dc.contributor.authorSener, Muhittin
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-20T15:03:40Z
dc.date.available2020-11-20T15:03:40Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.issn1017-995X
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.3944/AOTT.2015.15.0140
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12809/2765
dc.descriptionAkgun, Ulas/0000-0002-5298-6559en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000372181200007en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed ID: 26969950en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: The prognostic factors that affect sensory nerve recovery after digital nerve repair are variable because of nonhomogeneous data, subjective tests, and different assessment/scoring methods. The aim of this study was to evaluate the success of sensory nerve recovery after digital nerve repair and to investigate the prognostic factors in sensorial healing. Methods: Ninety-six digital nerve repairs of 63 patients were retrospectively evaluated. All nerves were repaired with end-to-end neurorraphy. The static two-point discrimination (s2PD) and Semmes Weinstein monofilament (SWM) tests were performed to evaluate sensory recovery. The association between prognostic factors such as gender, age, involved digit, time from injury to repair, length of follow-up, smoking, concomitant injuries, type of injury, and sensory recovery results were assessed. Results: The s2PD test demonstrated excellent results in 26 nerves (27%), good results in 61 nerves (64%), and poor results in 9 nerves (9%). The results of the SWM test according to Imai classification showed that 31 nerves (32%) were normal, light touch was diminished in 38 nerves (40%), protective sensation was diminished in 17 nerves (18%), loss of protective sensation occurred in 5 nerves (5%), and 5 nerves (5%) were anesthetic. There was a negative relationship between age, smoking, concomitant injuries, and sensory recovery. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that concomitant tendon, bone and vascular injuries, older age, and smoking were associated with worse sensory nerve recovery results. However, all digital nerve injuries should be repaired, regardless of these prognostic factors.en_US
dc.item-language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTurkish Assoc Orthopaedics Traumatologyen_US
dc.item-rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectDigital Nerveen_US
dc.subjectDiscrimination Testen_US
dc.subjectMonofilament Testen_US
dc.subjectSensory Recoveryen_US
dc.subjectTwo-Pointen_US
dc.titlePrognostic factors in sensory recovery after digital nerve repairen_US
dc.item-typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmenten_US
dc.contributor.departmentTemp[Bulut, Tugrul; Citlak, Atilla; Aslan, Cihan; Sener, Muhittin] Izmir Katip Celebi Univ, Ataturk Training & Res Hosp, Dept Orthopaed & Traumatol, Izmir, Turkey -- [Akgun, Ulas] Mugla Sitki Kocman Univ, Fac Med, Dept Orthopaed & Traumatol, Mugla, Turkey -- [Sener, Ufuk] Izmir Tepecik Training & Res Hosp, Dept Neurol, Izmir, Turkeyen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3944/AOTT.2015.15.0140
dc.identifier.volume50en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage157en_US
dc.identifier.endpage161en_US
dc.relation.journalActa Orthopaedica Et Traumatologica Turcicaen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster