Acellular nerve allografts (ANAs) and other nerve constructs do not reliably facilitate axonal regeneration across long defects (>3 cm). Causes for this deficiency are poorly understood. In this study, we determined what cells are present within ANAs before axonal growth arrest in nerve constructs and if these cells express markers of cellular stress and senescence. Using the Thy1-GFP rat and serial imaging, we identified the time and location of axonal growth arrest in long (6 cm) ANAs. Axonal growth halted within long ANAs by 4 weeks, while axons successfully regenerated across short (3 cm) ANAs. Cellular populations and markers of senescence were determined using immunohistochemistry, histology, and senescence-associated β-galactosidase staining. Both short and long ANAs were robustly repopulated with Schwann cells (SCs) and stromal cells by 2 weeks. Schwann cells (S100β(+)) represented the majority of cells repopulating both ANAs. Overall, both ANAs demonstrated similar cellular populations with the exception of increased stromal cells (fibronectin(+)/S100β(-)/CD68(-) cells) in long ANAs. Characterization of ANAs for markers of cellular senescence revealed that long ANAs accumulated much greater levels of senescence markers and a greater percentage of Schwann cells expressing the senescence marker p16 compared to short ANAs. To establish the impact of the long ANA environment on axonal regeneration, short ANAs (2 cm) that would normally support axonal regeneration were generated from long ANAs near the time of axonal growth arrest ("stressed" ANAs). These stressed ANAs contained mainly S100β(+)/p16(+) cells and markedly reduced axonal regeneration. In additional experiments, removal of the distal portion (4 cm) of long ANAs near the time of axonal growth arrest and replacement with long isografts (4 cm) rescued axonal regeneration across the defect. Neuronal culture derived from nerve following axonal growth arrest in long ANAs revealed no deficits in axonal extension. Overall, this evidence demonstrates that long ANAs are repopulated with increased p16(+) Schwann cells and stromal cells compared to short ANAs, suggesting a role for these cells in poor axonal regeneration across nerve constructs.

This study shows that axon regeneration is reduced in long compared with short isografts, where long isografts contained an environment with an increased accumulation of senescent markers. Although autografts are considered the gold standard for grafting, these results demonstrate that we must continue to strive for improvements in the autograft regenerative environment.

Introduction Neuroenhancing therapies are desired because repair of nerve injuries can fail to achieve recovery. We compared two neuroenhancing therapies, electrical stimulation (ES) and systemic tacrolimus (FK506), for their capabilities to enhance regeneration in the context of a rat model. Methods Rats were randomized to four groups: ES 0.5 mA, ES 2.0 mA, FK506, and repair alone. All groups underwent tibial nerve transection and repair, and outcomes were assessed by using twice per week walking track analysis, cold allodynia response, relative muscle mass, and nerve histology. Results Electrical stimulation and FK506 groups demonstrated improved functional recovery and myelinated axon counts distal to the repair compared with repair alone. Electrical stimulation provided improvements in nerve regeneration that were not different from optimized FK506 systemic administration. Discussion Providing ES after nerve repair improved regeneration and recovery in rats, with minimal differences in therapeutic efficacy to FK506, further demonstrating its clinical potential to improve management of nerve injuries.

No abstract

Background:Clinical outcomes following nerve injury repair can be inadequate. Pulsed-current electrical stimulation (ES) is a therapeutic method that facilitates functional recovery by accelerating axon regeneration. However, current clinical ES protocols involve the application of ES for 60 minutes during surgery, which can increase operative complexity and time. Shorter ES protocols could be a strategy to facilitate broader clinical adoption. The purpose of the present study was to determine if a 10-minute ES protocol could improve outcomes.Methods:C57BL/6J mice were randomized to 3 groups: no ES, 10 minutes of ES, and 60 minutes of ES. In all groups, the sciatic nerve was transected and repaired, and, in the latter 2 groups, ES was applied after repair. Postoperatively, changes to gene expression from dorsal root ganglia were measured after 24 hours. The number of motoneurons regenerating axons was determined by retrograde labeling at 7 days. Histomorphological analyses of the nerve were performed at 14 days. Function was evaluated serially with use of behavioral tests up to 56 days postoperatively, and relative muscle weight was evaluated.Results:Compared with the no-ES group, both ES groups demonstrated increased regeneration-associated gene expression within dorsal root ganglia. The 10-minute and 60-minute ES groups demonstrated accelerated axon regeneration compared with the no-ES group based on increased numbers of labeled motoneurons regenerating axons (mean difference, 202.0 [95% confidence interval (CI), 17.5 to 386.5] and 219.4 [95% CI, 34.9 to 403.9], respectively) and myelinated axon counts (mean difference, 559.3 [95% CI, 241.1 to 877.5] and 339.4 [95% CI, 21.2 to 657.6], respectively). The 10-minute and 60-minute ES groups had improved behavioral recovery, including on grid-walking analysis, compared with the no-ES group (mean difference, 11.9% [95% CI, 3.8% to 20.0%] and 10.9% [95% CI, 2.9% to 19.0%], respectively). There was no difference between the ES groups in measured outcomes.Conclusions:A 10-minute ES protocol accelerated axon regeneration and facilitated functional recovery.Clinical Relevance:The brief (10-minute) ES protocol provided similar benefits to the 60-minute protocol in an acute sciatic nerve transection/repair mice model and merits further studies.

Background: Repair of nerve injuries can fail to achieve adequate functional recovery. Electrical stimulation applied at the time of nerve repair can accelerate axon regeneration, which may improve the likelihood of recovery. However, widespread use of electrical stimulation may be limited by treatment protocols that increase operative time and complexity. This study evaluated whether a short-duration electrical stimulation protocol (10 minutes) was efficacious to enhance regeneration following nerve repair using rat models. Methods: Lewis and Thy1–green fluorescent protein rats were randomized to three groups: 0 minutes of electrical stimulation (no electrical stimulation; control), 10 minutes of electrical stimulation, and 60 minutes of electrical stimulation. All groups underwent tibial nerve transection and repair. In the intervention groups, electrical stimulation was delivered after nerve repair. Outcomes were assessed using immunohistochemistry, histology, and serial walking track analysis. Results: Two weeks after nerve repair, Thy1–green fluorescent protein rats demonstrated increased green fluorescent protein–positive axon outgrowth from the repair site with electrical stimulation compared to no electrical stimulation. Serial measurement of walking tracks after nerve repair revealed recovery was achieved more rapidly in both electrical stimulation groups as compared to no electrical stimulation. Histologic analysis of nerve distal to the repair at 8 weeks revealed robust axon regeneration in all groups. Conclusions: As little as 10 minutes of intraoperative electrical stimulation therapy increased early axon regeneration and facilitated functional recovery following nerve transection with repair. Also, as early axon outgrowth increased following electrical stimulation with nerve repair, these findings suggest electrical stimulation facilitated recovery because of earlier axon growth across the suture-repaired site into the distal nerve to reach end-organ targets. Clinical Relevance Statement: Brief (10-minute) electrical stimulation therapy can provide similar benefits to the 60-minute protocol in an acute sciatic nerve transection/repair rat model and merit further studies, as they represent a translational advantage.

Background: Therapeutic electrical stimulation (ES) applied to repaired nerve is a promising treatment option to improve regeneration. However, few studies address the impact of ES following nerve graft reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine if ES applied to a nerve repair using nerve isograft in a rodent model could improve nerve regeneration and functional recovery. Methods: Adult rats were randomized to 2 groups: “ES” and “Control.” Rats received a tibial nerve transection that was repaired using a tibial nerve isograft (1.0 cm length), where ES was applied immediately after repair in the applicable group. Nerve was harvested 2 weeks postrepair for immunohistochemical analysis of axon growth and macrophage accumulation. Independently, rats were assessed using walking track and grid-walk analysis for up to 21 weeks. Results: At 2 weeks, more robust axon regeneration and greater macrophage accumulation was observed within the isografts for the ES compared to Control groups. Both walking track and grid-walk analysis revealed that return of functional recovery was accelerated by ES. The ES group demonstrated improved functional recovery over time, as well as improved recovery compared to the Control group at 21 weeks. Conclusions: ES improved early axon regeneration into a nerve isograft and was associated with increased macrophage and beneficial M2 macrophage accumulation within the isograft. ES ultimately improved functional recovery compared to isograft repair alone. This study supports the clinical potential of ES to improve the management of nerve injuries requiring a nerve graft repair.

A hybrid ANA confers minimal motor recovery benefits for regeneration across long gaps. Clinically, the authors will continue to reconstruct long nerve gaps with autografts. Muscle Nerve 57: 260-267, 2018.