Elsevier

Injury

Volume 43, Issue 5, May 2012, Pages 553-572
Injury

Review
FDA approved guidance conduits and wraps for peripheral nerve injury: A review of materials and efficacy

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2010.12.030Get rights and content

Abstract

Several nerve guidance conduits (NGCs) and nerve protectant wraps are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for clinical use in peripheral nerve repair. These devices cover a wide range of natural and synthetic materials, which may or may not be resorbable. This review consolidates the data pertaining to all FDA approved materials into a single reference, which emphasizes material composition alongside pre-clinical and clinical safety and efficacy (where possible). This article also summarizes the key advantages and limitations for each material as noted in the literature (with respect to the indication considered). In this context, this review provides a comprehensive reference for clinicians which may facilitate optimal material/device selection for peripheral nerve repair. For materials scientists, this review highlights predicate devices and evaluation methodologies, offering an insight into current deficiencies associated with state-of-the-art materials and may help direct new technology developments and evaluation methodologies thereof.

Introduction

Insufficient functional recovery after peripheral nerve injury (PNI) continues to be a significant clinical challenge.1 Since the mid-1980s, the FDA have approved several devices based on natural and synthetic biomaterials to repair nerve defects arising from PNI. PNIs result in over 8.5 million restricted activity days and almost 5 million bed/disability days each year2, 3; unfortunately, not all are manageable via surgical intervention. Consequently, over 200,000 peripheral nerve repair procedures are performed annually in the US.4 Surgical interventions such as neurorhaphy – direct suture repair without the use of grafted materials – may be deployed for short (<5 mm) nerve gaps. However, larger defects repaired by neurorhaphy, exhibit excessive tension over the suture line and offer poor surgical results.5 There are various surgical techniques used to perform neurorrhaphy, including: (i) conventional group fascicular repair comprising micro-sutures placed through the inter-fascicular and external epineurial tissue,6, 7 (ii) perineural repair; involving the suturing of corresponding nerve fascicles and distal nerve stump for optimum alignment,8 and (iii) epineural repair; usually applied directly to the transected nerve injury and comprises sutures passed through the epineurial sheath. The latter being an easier and faster method which minimizes both the internal disruption of the nerve as well as the disturbance of the blood supply.6, 9 Neurotisation (nerve transfer) is an alternative, graft free intervention, which connects the proximal nerve stump directly to the muscle belly and can be used in only very selected situations. Generally, however, neurotisation procedures have poorer results than neurorrhapy or nerve grafting.5 Given these limitations and the clinical need to repair larger defects, procedures utilizing graft materials are necessary.

The majority of recent research efforts in the field of peripheral nerve grafting has emphasized enclosing (entubulating) opposing nerve stumps (of the severed nerve) in a non-neural tube (Nerve Guidance Conduit or NGC) fabricated from natural or synthetic materials.5, 10, 11, 12, 13 The desired effect of nerve entubulation: is to increase the (i) number; (ii) speed, and (iii) length of the regenerating axons.14 After the nerve stumps are inserted and sutured into the ends of the tube, a protein-rich (axoplasmic) fluid exudate from the nerve stumps, which contains growth-promoting substances, is released into the NGC (see Fig. 1). A neomatrix of fibrin will be formed within days providing support for the migration of Schwann cells, as well as fibroblasts and macrophages. From the perspective of an NGC it is important to note that Schwann cells have the ability to support their own survival by autocrine circuits, and block apoptosis when cultured in a high density, thus, enhancing potential for axonal growth from the proximal end towards the distal stump.15

To promote axonal regeneration and achieve functional recovery, it is critical to minimize the period of wallerian degeneration which is controlled by four critical factors4:

  • (i)

    The existence of Schwann cells.

  • (ii)

    The secretion of neurotrophic factors (NTFs) after injury and during regeneration.

  • (iii)

    The existence of a basal lamina: a specialized type of extracellular (ECM) matrix that acts as a scaffold for neural cells. The components ECM have been shown to promote neurite elongation in vivo and (iv) the existence of a distal stump.

  • (iv)

    The distal nerve has also been found to be important for peripheral nerve regeneration because it supplies various neurotrophic factors for axonal regeneration.

NGCs are required to mechanically support and direct axonal sprouting between the injured nerve stumps; whilst preventing fibrous tissue ingrowth into the injury site and retain neutrophic and neurotropic factors secreted by the damaged nerve ends.17 To support these requirements, the following criterion for idealized NGCs and protectant wrap devices have been identified17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27:

  • (i)

    The biomaterial employed must be biocompatible and provoke no inflammatory response.

  • (ii)

    The biomaterial must be biodegradable whilst maintaining a mechanically stable architecture during the regeneration process and resist tear from sutures and tissue inflammation.

  • (iii)

    The device must be flexible and soft so as to prevent compression of regenerating axons and limit tissue inflammation respectively.

  • (iv)

    The device should provide a guidance cue (via a tubular 3D structure) for the extending growth cone to eliminate misdirection.

  • (v)

    The biomaterial must be semi permeable to allow the diffusion/influx of oxygen and nutrients from interstitial fluid to the surviving nerve tissue through pores in the conduit wall.17 The need to facilitate this requirement via adjusting the conduit wall porosity is restricted by the opposing need to prevent the infiltration of inflammatory cells into the conduit and to minimize the diffusion of growth factors out of the conduit28 for which preferable pore sizes in the range of about 5–30 μm, preferably about 10–20 μm are reported. They propose that a pore size less than about 5 μm inhibits cells and tissue to proliferate, whereas if the pore size exceeds about 30 μm, entry of inflammatory cells becomes excessive. Controlling permeability may also affect the formation of the fibrin matrix in the initial stage of regeneration.26

  • (vi)

    The device should prevent fibrous tissue ingrowth into the injury site and retain secreted neurotrophic factors secreted by the damaged nerve ends.

  • (vii)

    The device must meet technical requirements for further production, sterilization, long-term storage, and surgical handling, such as, suturing (suture retention and tear).

In addition, such biomaterials and their contiguous devices must have the appropriate dimensions to facilitate bridging the nerve gap defect without tension and the conduit width must also be able to house securely the two nerve end stumps without any compression.29, 30, 31 The internal diameter and wall thickness of NGCs appears to influence the rate of nerve regeneration and, as such, the tube must be large enough to accommodate any swelling of the nerve without resulting in any compression of the nerve by swelling during degradation of the tubular construct.17 The use of artificial NGCs enables the fabrication of a wide specification of conduit sizes to suit site-specific nerve lesions in mass production and as such offer significant advantages over autograft and allograft material. In brief, the design specification required: is a biocompatible and bioresorbable scaffold that supports outgrowing axons (neurite extension) within a microenvironment known to favour peripheral nerve regeneration, whilst minimizing the interactions between the myofibroblasts and axon growth. With these specifications for preparing optimum NGCs in mind, the FDA have approved the following products (devices) with regards their safety and efficacy in addressing the requirements to promote complete peripheral nerve regeneration across inter sump gaps (nerve lesions) and nerve crush injuries post traumatic injury.

Section snippets

Methodology

The premarket notifications (510(k)s) medical devices database (http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/Databases/default.htm) on the FDA website was used to correlate all of the Class II FDA approved peripheral nerve regeneration devices currently on the market. This database (of releasable 510(k)s) can be searched by 510(k) number, applicant, device name and/or FDA product code. The regulation number for these devices is classified by the FDA as 882.5275 (nerve cuff) as

Current state of the art

The following section provides the review of current state-of-the-art materials with respect to approved devices for peripheral nerve regeneration, and in the context of the ideal device outlined in Section “The ideal nerve repair device: current concepts”. To provide additional context, this section will outline the key features of autograft and allograft tissue prior to examining FDA approved devices under the following headings:

  • (i)

    Non-resorbable devices.

  • (ii)

    Natural resorbable devices.

  • (iii)

    Synthetic

Polyglycolic acid (Neurotube®)

Polyglycolide (PGA) is a rigid thermoplastic, highly crystalline polymer (45–55% crystallinity27, 93) which exhibits a high tensile modulus with very low solubility in organic solvents.94 The glass transition for the polymer ranges from 35–40 °C with a melting point in excess of 200 °C.27, 93 PGA has excellent mechanical properties for the indication due to its high crystallinity and has a Young's Modulus of up to 12.5 GPa.95, 96 PGA is a bulk degrading polymer which degrades by the non-specific

Conclusions

Since 1995, 11 devices (NGCs and nerve protectant wraps) based on natural and synthetic materials have been approved by the FDA for the repair of peripheral nerve injuries. Whilst autograft remains the gold standard, a large amount of published prospective and retrospective clinical studies have been performed with NeuraGen® (collagen type I NGC) and have demonstrated its comparable efficacy to autograft in discontinuities up to 20 mm. In respect, of synthetic materials, and based on the weight

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no financial interest or commercial association with any of the products mentioned in this manuscript.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by Enterprise Ireland as a proof of concept (PC/2008/315) project under the National Development Plan.

References (142)

  • G.R.D. Evans et al.

    In vivo evaluation of poly(l-lactic acid) porous conduits for peripheral nerve regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (1999)
  • T.W. Hudson et al.

    Engineering strategies for peripheral nerve repair

    Clinics in Plastic Surgery

    (1999)
  • M. Lietz et al.

    Neuro tissue engineering of glial nerve guides and the impact of different cell types

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • R.V. Bellamkonda

    Peripheral nerve regeneration: an opinion on channels, scaffolds and anisotropy

    Biomaterials

    (2006)
  • S.M. Willerth et al.

    Approaches to neural tissue engineering using scaffolds for drug delivery

    Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews

    (2007)
  • G.C.W. de Ruiter et al.

    Nerve tubes for peripheral nerve repair

    Neurosurgery Clinics of North America

    (2009)
  • X. Jiang et al.

    Current applications and future perspectives of artificial nerve conduits

    Experimental Neurology

    (2010)
  • S. Wang et al.

    A new nerve guide conduit material composed of a biodegradable poly(phosphoester)

    Biomaterials

    (2001)
  • J.S. Taras et al.

    Nerve conduits

    Journal of Hand Therapy

    (2005)
  • D. Muir

    The potentiation of peripheral nerve sheaths in regeneration and repair

    Experimental Neurology

    (2010)
  • M. Gabriel et al.

    Cryopreserved arterial allografts in the treatment of prosthetic graft infections

    European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery

    (2004)
  • A. Moradzadeh et al.

    The impact of motor and sensory nerve architecture on nerve regeneration

    Experimental Neurology

    (2008)
  • D. Neubauer et al.

    Nerve grafts with various sensory and motor fiber compositions are equally effective for the repair of a mixed nerve defect

    Experimental Neurology

    (2010)
  • D. Neubauer et al.

    Chondroitinase treatment increases the effective length of acellular nerve grafts

    Experimental Neurology

    (2007)
  • B.L. Seal et al.

    Polymeric biomaterials for tissue and organ regeneration

    Materials Science & Engineering R-Reports

    (2001)
  • J.A. Stammen et al.

    Mechanical properties of a novel PVA hydrogel in shear and unconfined compression

    Biomaterials

    (2001)
  • L. Chamberlain et al.

    Early peripheral nerve healing in collagen and silicone tube implants: myofibroblasts and the cellular response

    Biomaterials

    (1998)
  • R. Midha et al.

    Tissue engineered alternatives to nerve transplantation for repair of peripheral nervous system injuries

    Transplantation Proceedings

    (2001)
  • M.R. Ahmed et al.

    Microwave irradiated collagen tubes as a better matrix for peripheral nerve regeneration

    Brain Research

    (2005)
  • M. Landry et al.

    Galaninergic mechanisms at the spinal level: focus on histochemical phenotyping

    Neuropeptides

    (2005)
  • F. Stang et al.

    Structural parameters of collagen nerve grafts influence peripheral nerve regeneration

    Biomaterials

    (2005)
  • S.T. Li et al.

    Peripheral nerve repair with collagen conduits

    Clinical Materials

    (1992)
  • T.R. Tyner et al.

    Effects of collagen nerve guide on neuroma formation and neuropathic pain in a rat model

    The American Journal of Surgery

    (2007)
  • A. Farole et al.

    A Bioabsorbable collagen nerve cuff (NeuraGen) for repair of lingual and inferior alveolar nerve injuries: a case series

    Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

    (2008)
  • B.D. Bushnell et al.

    Early clinical experience with collagen nerve tubes in digital nerve repair

    The Journal of Hand Surgery

    (2008)
  • Y.J. Li et al.

    Repair of peripheral nerve defect by xenogeneic acellular nerve basal lamina scaffolds

    Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi

    (2002)
  • S.F. Badylak et al.

    Small intestinal submucosa as a large diameter vascular graft in the dog

    The Journal of Surgical Research

    (1989)
  • F. Campodonico et al.

    Bladder cell culture on small intestinal submucosa as bioscaffold: experimental study on engineered urothelial grafts

    European Urology

    (2004)
  • Y. Su et al.

    Study of biocompatibility of small intestinal submucosa (SIS) with Schwann cells in vitro

    Brain Research

    (2007)
  • L.S. Nair et al.

    Biodegradable polymers as biomaterials

    Progress in Polymer Science

    (2007)
  • P. Gunatillake et al.

    Recent developments in biodegradable synthetic polymers

    Biotechnology Annual Review

    (2006)
  • H. Tabesh et al.

    The role of biodegradable engineered scaffolds seeded with Schwann cells for spinal cord regeneration

    Neurochemistry International

    (2009)
  • P. Tormala

    Biodegradable self-reinforced composite materials; manufacturing structure and mechanical properties

    Clinical Materials

    (1992)
  • P.B. Maurus et al.

    Bioabsorbable implant material review

    Operative Techniques in Sports Medicine

    (2004)
  • J.S. Belkas et al.

    Peripheral nerve regeneration through guidance tubes

    Neurological Research

    (2004)
  • T. Matsuyama et al.

    Peripheral nerve repair and grafting techniques: a review

    Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica

    (2000)
  • K. Rowshan et al.

    Evaluation of myelin changes during chronic nerve compression

    Journal of Investigative Medicine

    (2004)
  • M. Landers et al.

    Peripheral nerve injury

    Advances in Physiotherapy

    (2003)
  • G.R. Evans

    Peripheral nerve injury: a review and approach to tissue engineered constructs

    Anatomical Record

    (2001)
  • A.G. Grand et al.

    Axonal regeneration after cold preservation of nerve allografts and immunosuppression with tacrolimus in mice

    Journal of Neurosurgery

    (2002)
  • Cited by (567)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text