Cochrane · systematic review · CD012574
Bioengineered nerve conduits and wraps for peripheral nerve repair of the upper limb
Thomson, SE, Ng, NYB, Riehle, MO, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2022 · Cochrane Library
NeuromuscularAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
5
No studies
2
Included studies
NR
No studies 2 · 28.6%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 4 · 57.1%Low 1 · 14.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Bioengineered devices compared to standard techniques for peripheral nerve repair of the upper limb
Population: people undergoing peripheral nerve repair of the upper limb
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Muscle strength at ≥ 24 months Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Sensory recovery at ≥ 24 months Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 28 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Integrated functional outcome at ≥ 24 months Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 60 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Touch threshold Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 32 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness |
Impact on daily living Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events assessed as: adverse events (serious and non‐serious) Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | RR 7.15 [1.74, 29.42] | 5 studies · 213 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Specific serious adverse events: further surgery (device removal or revision)i assessed as: any unplanned secondary surgery to remove device Bioengineered devices vs standard techniques | RR 7.61 [1.48, 39.02] | 5 studies · 256 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |