Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Common Fibular Nerve (common + fibular_nerve)
Selected AbstractsElectrical stimulation promotes peripheral axon regeneration by enhanced neuronal neurotrophin signalingDEVELOPMENTAL NEUROBIOLOGY, Issue 2 2007Arthur W. English Abstract Electrical stimulation of cut peripheral nerves at the time of their surgical repair results in an enhancement of axon regeneration. Regeneration of axons through nerve allografts was used to evaluate whether this effect is due to an augmentation of cell autonomous neurotrophin signaling in the axons or signaling from neurotrophins produced in the surrounding environment. In the thy-1-YFP-H mouse, a single 1 h application of electrical stimulation at the time of surgical repair of the cut common fibular nerve results in a significant increase in the proportion of YFP+ dorsal root ganglion neurons, which were immunoreactive for BDNF or trkB, as well as an increase in the length of regenerating axons through allografts from wild type litter mates, both 1 and 2 weeks later. Axon growth through allografts from neurotrophin-4/5 knockout mice or grafts made acellular by repeated cycles of freezing and thawing is normally very poor, but electrical stimulation results in a growth of axons through these grafts, which is similar to that observed through grafts from wild type mice after electrical stimulation. When cut nerves in NT-4/5 knockout mice were electrically stimulated, no enhancement of axon regeneration was found. Electrical stimulation thus produces a potent enhancement of the regeneration of axons in cut peripheral nerves, which is independent of neurotrophin production by cells in their surrounding environment but is dependent on stimulation of trkB and its ligands in the regenerating axons themselves. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Develop Neurobiol 67: 158,172, 2007. [source] Protective mechanisms of the common fibular nerve in and around the fibular tunnel: A new conceptCLINICAL ANATOMY, Issue 6 2009Ramadan M. El Gharbawy Abstract The most frequent site at which the common fibular nerve is affected by compression, trauma, traction, masses, and surgery is within and around the fibular tunnel. The aim of this study was to determine whether there were protective mechanisms at this site that guard against compression of the nerve. Twenty-six lower limbs of 13 preserved adult cadavers (11 males and two females) were used. Proximal to the entrance of the tunnel, three anatomical configurations seemed to afford the required protection for the nerve: reinforcement of the deep fascia; tethering of the common fibular nerve to both the tendon of the biceps femoris and the reinforced fascia; and the particular arrangement of the deep fascia, fibular head, and soleus and gastrocnemius muscles. At the entrance of the tunnel, contraction of the first segment of fibularis longus muscle could afford the required protection. In the tunnel, contraction of the second and third segments of fibularis longus muscle could guard against compression of the nerve. The tough fascia on the surface of fibularis longus muscle and the fascial band within it, which have long been accused of compression of the nerve, may actually be elements of the protective mechanisms. We conclude that there are innate, anatomical protective mechanisms which should be taken into consideration when decompressing the common fibular nerve. To preserve these mechanisms whenever possible, the technique should be planned and varied according to the underlying etiology. Clin. Anat. 22:738,746, 2009. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Restoration of motor function of the deep fibular (peroneal) nerve by direct nerve transfer of branches from the tibial nerve: An anatomical study,CLINICAL ANATOMY, Issue 3 2004Kale D. Bodily Abstract Traction injuries of the common fibular (peroneal) nerve frequently result in significant morbidity due to tibialis anterior muscle paralysis and the associated loss of ankle dorsiflexion. Because current treatment options are often unsuccessful or unsatisfactory, other treatment approaches need to be explored. In this investigation, the anatomical feasibility of an alternative option, consisting of nerve transfer of motor branches from the tibial nerve to the deep fibular nerve, was studied. In ten cadaveric limbs, the branching pattern, length, and diameter of motor branches of the tibial nerve in the proximal leg were characterized; nerve transfer of each of these motor branches was then simulated to the proximal deep fibular nerve. A consistent, reproducible pattern of tibial nerve innervation was seen with minor variability. Branches to the flexor hallucis longus and flexor digitorum longus muscles were determined to be adequate, based on their branch point, branch pattern, and length, for direct nerve transfer in all specimens. Other branches, including those to the tibialis posterior, popliteus, gastrocnemius, and soleus muscles were not consistently adequate for direct nerve transfer for injuries extending to the bifurcation of the common fibular nerve or distal to it. For neuromas of the common fibular nerve that do not extend as far distally, branches to the soleus and lateral head of the gastrocnemius may be adequate for direct transfer if the intramuscular portions of these nerves are dissected. This study confirms the anatomical feasibility of direct nerve transfer using nerves to toe-flexor muscles as a treatment option to restore ankle dorsiflexion in cases of common fibular nerve injury. Clin. Anat. 17:201,205, 2004. © 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Anatomical variations of the sural nerveCLINICAL ANATOMY, Issue 4 2002Pasuk Mahakkanukrauh Abstract An anatomical study of the formation of the sural nerve (SN) was carried out on 76 Thai cadavers. The results revealed that 67.1% of the SNs were formed by the union of the medial sural cutaneous nerve (MSCN) and the lateral sural cutaneous nerve (LSCN); the MSCN and LSCN are branches of the tibial and the common fibular (peroneal) nerves, respectively. The site of union was variable: 5.9% in the popliteal fossa, 1.9% in the middle third of the leg, 66.7% in the lower third of the leg, and 25.5% at or just below the ankle. One SN (0.7%) was formed by the union of the MSCN and a different branch of the common fibular nerve, running parallel and medial to but not connecting with the LSCN, which joined the MSCN in the lower third of the leg. The remaining 32.2% of the SNs were a direct continuation of the MSCN. The SNs ranged from 6,30 cm (mean = 14.41 cm) in length with a range in diameter of 3.5,3.8 mm (mean = 3.61 mm), and were easily located 1,1.5 cm posterior to the posterior border of the lateral malleolus. The LSCNs were 15,32 cm long (mean = 22.48 cm) with a diameter between 2.7,3.4 mm (mean = 3.22 mm); the MSCNs were 17,31 cm long (mean = 20.42 cm) with a diameter between 2.3,2.5 mm (mean = 2.41 mm). Clinically, the SN is widely used for both diagnostic (biopsy and nerve conduction velocity studies) and therapeutic purposes (nerve grafting) and the LSCN is used for a sensate free flap; thus, a detailed knowledge of the anatomy of the SN and its contributing nerves are important in carrying out these and other procedures. Clin. Anat. 15:263,266, 2002. © 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] | ||||||||||