Nerve Regeneration Using Polyglycolic Acid-Collagen Tube Following Tumor Resection in The Inferior Alveolar Nerve

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

Comments: Yes, the topic is relevant to the journal area of interest as it discusses nerve regeneration using a polyglycolic acid-collagen tube following tumor resection in the inferior alveolar nerve.

This topic is contemporary and interesting for researchers as it provides a new approach to addressing sensory nerve injuries in the oral region, with the potential for improved outcomes and reduced complications compared to traditional autologous nerve grafting.

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

Comments: Yes, all required components are included in the abstract. It provides a brief background on the conduit (NERBRIDGE®) for peripheral nerve regeneration, mentions its scarcity in use for sensory nerve injuries in the oral region, describes the case of sensory recovery after inferior alveolar nerve resection due to schwannoma, and concludes with the confirmation of sensory nerve recovery using the two-point discrimination test at the 1-year postoperative evaluation.

The keywords are appropriately chosen as they cover the main aspects of the study.

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

Comments: The goal is not explicitly stated in the Introduction, but it can be inferred from the context. The Introduction briefly discusses the challenges of nerve reconstruction in cases of mandibular tumorectomy and the potential benefits of using a nerve conduit, like the polyglycolic acid-collagen (PGA) tube, in these cases.

However, the formulation could be improved by clearly stating the goal of the study. For example, the authors could add a sentence like, "The goal of this case report is to demonstrate the potential benefits of using NERBRIDGE®, a polyglycolic acid-collagen (PGA) tube, for nerve regeneration following tumor resection in the inferior alveolar nerve." This would make the goal clear and unambiguous for the readers.

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

Comments: Yes, the paper's structure is coherent and is in coherence with the goal of the paper. The paper follows a clear structure that is commonly used in case reports:

Introduction: The Introduction provides a background on the challenges of nerve reconstruction following mandibular tumorectomy and the potential use of a nerve conduit, like the polyglycolic acid-collagen (PGA) tube, in these cases.

Case report: This section describes the case of a 35-year-old female patient with a peripheral nerve tumor in the inferior alveolar nerve, the surgical procedure followed, and the use of the PGA tube (NERBRIDGE®) for nerve reconstruction.

Discussion: In the Discussion section, the authors compare their findings with previous studies, discuss the advantages of using NERBRIDGE® over traditional autologous nerve grafting, and highlight the sensory recovery observed in their patient.

The structure of the paper effectively supports the goal of demonstrating the potential benefits of using NERBRIDGE® for nerve regeneration following tumor resection in the inferior alveolar nerve.

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

Comments: Yes, the methods used by the author are adequate and well used for a case report. The author provides a detailed description of the clinical presentation, diagnostic process, surgical procedure, and postoperative follow-up for the patient:

 Diagnostic process: The author outlines the initial examination, panoramic radiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging used to diagnose the patient and plan the surgical procedure.

 Surgical procedure: The author describes the surgical approach, including the resection of the tumor, the use of NERBRIDGE® for nerve reconstruction, and the repositioning and fixation of the cortical bone flap.

 Postoperative follow-up: The author reports regular evaluations of the patient's sensory inputs at the lips and chin after surgery using a two-point discrimination test. The postoperative follow-up timeline and sensory recovery progress are provided.

 These methods are appropriate for a case report, as they offer a comprehensive account of the patient's treatment and recovery. Furthermore, the author compares their findings with previous studies in the Discussion section, providing context and insights into the potential advantages of using NERBRIDGE® for nerve regeneration in similar cases.

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

Comments: Yes, the methods described in the case report are related to the results presented, and they are coherent. The results section of the case report documents the patient's sensory recovery following the surgical procedure, specifically the use of NERBRIDGE® for nerve regeneration. The two-point discrimination test results, mentioned at various time points postoperatively, indicate the improvement in sensory function.

The coherence between the methods and the results is evident, as the surgical procedure involving NERBRIDGE® and the subsequent evaluation of sensory recovery using the two-point discrimination test are clearly connected. The sensory recovery observed in the patient supports the overall goal of the paper, demonstrating the potential benefits of using NERBRIDGE® for nerve regeneration following tumor resection in the inferior alveolar nerve.

 In conclusion, the methods and results presented in the paper are coherent and well-connected, providing evidence of the effectiveness of using NERBRIDGE® for nerve regeneration in this specific case.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

Comments: Yes, the author utilizes relevant literature in the case report. Throughout the text, the author cites several studies that provide context and support for the use of NERBRIDGE® and nerve conduits in general. These studies cover various aspects of nerve regeneration, such as the process of tubulation, the development of nerve conduits, and the comparison of nerve conduits with autologous nerve grafting.

 The author also refers to studies that have reported on the use of NERBRIDGE® specifically in orthopedic surgery, as well as the limited number of cases reported in the oral region. By incorporating these references, the author highlights the novelty and potential applicability of NERBRIDGE® for sensory nerve injuries in the oral region.

 The use of relevant literature in the case report contributes to a better understanding of the context in which the described case is situated and allows the readers to appreciate the potential significance of the findings presented in this study.

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

Comments: The author demonstrates a good level of knowledge about the topic, as evidenced by the background information provided on nerve regeneration, the challenges of nerve reconstruction in mandibular tumorectomy, and the potential use of nerve conduits like NERBRIDGE®. The author also cites various relevant studies, showing familiarity with the existing literature.

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

Comments: The length of the paper seems to be adequate for a case report on this topic. The paper provides sufficient information on the background, clinical presentation, surgical procedure, and follow-up of the patient. It also includes a discussion on the advantages of using NERBRIDGE® over traditional nerve grafting methods and the significance of the findings in the context of existing literature.

As a case report, the paper's primary goal is to present a unique case and its implications for future research or clinical practice. The current length of the paper allows for a clear and comprehensive presentation of the case without being overly long or repetitive.

It is not recommended to shorten the paper, as the current length and structure provide the necessary details to effectively convey the case and its significance. Reducing the length could potentially remove important information and compromise the value of the case report.

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: The author includes seven figures in the case report to visually illustrate the surgical procedure and the use of NERBRIDGE® for nerve reconstruction. These figures are suitably used to complement the text and help the reader better understand the surgical technique and the intraoperative findings.

The legends and notations for the figures are mostly clear and provide adequate descriptions of the images. However, some minor improvements could be made to enhance their clarity:

1.     Ensure that all terms used in the legends are defined in the main text or the legend itself, such as "target sign" in the Introduction.

2.     In the legends, consider using complete sentences for consistency and better readability.

3.     For Figure 3, it may be helpful to label the lesion or tumor in the image itself, using an arrow or another marker, for easier identification.

By making these minor adjustments, the legends and notations will be clearer and more helpful for readers in understanding the case report's content.

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Yes, the case report is generally clear and understandable.

Further comments on the paper

Comments:

1.     Overall, this case report presents a valuable contribution to the literature on nerve regeneration, specifically in the context of sensory nerve injuries in the oral region. The author effectively demonstrates the potential of NERBRIDGE®, a polyglycolic acid-collagen tube, as a promising alternative for the regeneration of sensory nerve defects.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team