الفهرس 
ANATOMYOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 147 |  |  |
| | | from | 147 | | |
Abstract
Background: Peripheral nerve injury is a dramatic event that significantly affects the daily-living activities of victims sustaining such type of trauma. Most of cases sustaining sharp nerve injury need surgical repair, while patients who was subjected to other mechanism of injury as closed trauma or traction injury could be managed conservatively. So, the debate in sharp peripheral nerve injury is always the timing of intervention.
Purpose: To compare between early and delayed intervention as regard clinical outcome and electrophysiological studies
Patients and Methods: This prospective study was conducted on 30 patients suffering from sharp peripheral nerve injury in the period from January 2013 to July 2017. The patients were divided into 2 groups. group A had been treated by early surgical intervention within the first 48 hours. group B were treated by delayed intervention from 3 weeks post injury to 6 months. In case of nerve gap after removing neuroma, sural nerve graft was done to bridge the nerve gap.
Results: Our results show no statistically significant difference in clinical outcome between the 2 groups at short term (3 months) and intermediate term (6 month) follow up.
Conclusion: Immediate repair is a good option for repair of sharp peripheral nerve injury and if it is not possible (cut contused nerve, significant tissue loss or delayed presentation), secondary repair is a valid option for repair with comparable result.