Comparison of Nerve Transfers and Nerve Grafting for Traumatic Upper Plexus Palsy: A Systematic Review and Analysis

2011 ◽  
Vol 93 (9) ◽  
pp. 819-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohit Garg ◽  
Gregory A Merrell ◽  
Howard J Hillstrom ◽  
Scott W Wolfe
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Nerve Transfers

scholarly journals Investigation Into the Optimal Number of Intercostal Nerve Transfers for Musculocutaneous Nerve Reinnervation: A Systematic Review

Hand ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 621-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyuma A. Leland ◽  
Beina Azadgoli ◽  
Daniel J. Gould ◽  
Mitchel Seruya
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Intercostal Nerve ◽  
Optimal Number ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background: The purpose of this study was to systematically review outcomes following intercostal nerve (ICN) transfer for restoration of elbow flexion, with a focus on identifying the optimal number of nerve transfers. Methods: A systematic review was performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies describing ICN transfers to the musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) for traumatic brachial plexus injuries in patients 16 years or older. Demographics were recorded, including age, time to operation, and level of brachial plexus injury. Muscle strength was scored based upon the British Medical Research Council scale. Results: Twelve studies met inclusion criteria for a total of 196 patients. Either 2 (n = 113), 3 (n = 69), or 4 (n = 11) ICNs were transferred to the MCN in each patient. The groups were similar with regard to patient demographics. Elbow flexion ≥M3 was achieved in 71.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.1%-79.7%) of patients with 2 ICNs, 67.7% (95% CI, 55.3%-78.0%) of patients with 3 ICNs, and 77.0% (95% CI, 44.9%-93.2%) of patients with 4 ICNs ( P = .79). Elbow flexion ≥M4 was achieved in 51.1% (95% CI, 37.4%-64.6%) of patients with 2 ICNs, 42.1% (95% CI, 29.5%-55.9%) of patients with 3 ICNs, and 48.4% (95% CI, 19.2%-78.8%) of patients with 4 ICNs ( P = .66). Conclusions: Previous reports have described 2.5 times increased morbidity with each additional ICN harvest. Based on the equivalent strength of elbow flexion irrespective of the number of nerves transferred, 2 ICNs are recommended to the MCN to avoid further donor-site morbidity.

Trends in Brachial Plexus Surgery: Characterizing Contemporary Practices for Exploration of Supraclavicular Plexus

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472110146
Author(s):  
J. Ryan Hill ◽  
Steven T. Lanier ◽  
Liz Rolf ◽  
Aimee S. James ◽  
David M. Brogan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Technical Difficulty ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Lower Trunk ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Case Vignettes ◽  
Distal Nerve

Background There is variability in treatment strategies for patients with brachial plexus injury (BPI). We used qualitative research methods to better understand surgeons’ rationale for treatment approaches. We hypothesized that distal nerve transfers would be preferred over exploration and nerve grafting of the brachial plexus. Methods We conducted semi-structured interviews with BPI surgeons to discuss 3 case vignettes: pan-plexus injury, upper trunk injury, and lower trunk injury. The interview guide included questions regarding overall treatment strategy, indications and utility of brachial plexus exploration, and the role of nerve grafting and/or nerve transfers. Interview transcripts were coded by 2 researchers. We performed inductive thematic analysis to collate these codes into themes, focusing on the role of brachial plexus exploration in the treatment of BPI. Results Most surgeons routinely explore the supraclavicular brachial plexus in situations of pan-plexus and upper trunk injuries. Reasons to explore included the importance of obtaining a definitive root level diagnosis, perceived availability of donor nerve roots, timing of anticipated recovery, plans for distal reconstruction, and the potential for neurolysis. Very few explore lower trunk injuries, citing concern with technical difficulty and unfavorable risk-benefit profile. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that supraclavicular exploration remains a foundational component of surgical management of BPI, despite increasing utilization of distal nerve transfers. Availability of abundant donor axons and establishing an accurate diagnosis were cited as primary reasons in support of exploration. This analysis of surgeon interviews characterizes contemporary practices regarding the role of brachial plexus exploration in the treatment of BPI.

scholarly journals Upper brachial plexus injury in adults: comparative effectiveness of different repair techniques

2015 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zarina S. Ali ◽  
Gregory G. Heuer ◽  
Ryan W. F. Faught ◽  
Shriya H. Kaneriya ◽  
Umar A. Sheikh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Repair Techniques

OBJECT Adult upper trunk brachial plexus injuries result in significant disability. Several surgical treatment strategies exist, including nerve grafting, nerve transfers, and a combination of both approaches. However, no existing data clearly indicate the most successful strategy for restoring elbow flexion and shoulder abduction in these patients. The authors reviewed the literature to compare outcomes of the three surgical repair techniques listed above to determine the optimal approach to traumatic injury to the upper brachial plexus in adults. METHODS Both PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles containing the MeSH topic “brachial plexus” in conjunction with the word “injury” or “trauma” in the title and “surgery” or “repair” as a MeSH subheading or in the title, excluding pediatric articles and those articles limited to avulsions. The search was also limited to articles published after 1990 and containing at least 10 operated cases involving upper brachial plexus injuries. The search was supplemented with articles obtained through the “Related Articles” feature on PubMed and the bibliographies of selected publications. From the articles was collected information on the operation performed, number of operated cases, mean subject ages, sex distribution, interval between injury and surgery, source of nerve transfers, mean duration of follow-up, year of publication, and percentage of operative success in terms of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction of the injured limb. The recovery of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction was separately analyzed. A subanalysis was also performed to assess the recovery of elbow flexion following various neurotization techniques. RESULTS As regards the restoration of elbow flexion, nerve grafting led to significantly better outcomes than either nerve transfer or the combined techniques (F = 4.71, p = 0.0097). However, separating the Oberlin procedure from other neurotization techniques revealed that the former was significantly more successful (F = 82.82, p < 0.001). Moreover, in comparing the Oberlin procedure to nerve grafting or combined procedures, again the former was significantly more successful than either of the latter two approaches (F = 53.14; p < 0.001). In the restoration of shoulder abduction, nerve transfer was significantly more successful than the combined procedure (p = 0.046), which in turn was significantly better than nerve grafting procedures (F = 5.53, p = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS According to data in this study, in upper trunk brachial plexus injuries in adults, the Oberlin procedure and nerve transfers are the more successful approaches to restore elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, respectively, compared with nerve grafting or combined techniques. A prospective, randomized controlled trial would be necessary to fully elucidate differences in outcome among the various surgical approaches.

Nerve transfers in the upper extremity following cervical spinal cord injury. Part 1: Systematic review of the literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 629-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jawad M. Khalifeh ◽  
Christopher F. Dibble ◽  
Anna Van Voorhis ◽  
Michelle Doering ◽  
Martin I. Boyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Cervical Spinal Cord ◽  
Motor Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Extension ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Finger Extension ◽  
Cord Injury ◽  
Upper Extremity Function

OBJECTIVEPatients with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI)/tetraplegia consistently rank restoring arm and hand function as their top functional priority to improve quality of life. Motor nerve transfers traditionally used to treat peripheral nerve injuries are increasingly being used to treat patients with cervical SCIs. In this study, the authors performed a systematic review summarizing the published literature on nerve transfers to restore upper-extremity function in tetraplegia.METHODSA systematic literature search was conducted using Ovid MEDLINE 1946–, Embase 1947–, Scopus 1960–, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and clinicaltrials.gov to identify relevant literature published through January 2019. The authors included studies that provided original patient-level data and extracted information on clinical characteristics, operative details, and strength outcomes after nerve transfer procedures. Critical review and synthesis of the articles were performed.RESULTSTwenty-two unique studies, reporting on 158 nerve transfers in 118 upper limbs of 92 patients (87 males, 94.6%) were included in the systematic review. The mean duration from SCI to nerve transfer surgery was 18.7 months (range 4 months–13 years) and mean postoperative follow-up duration was 19.5 months (range 1 month–4 years). The main goals of reinnervation were the restoration of thumb and finger flexion, elbow extension, and wrist and finger extension. Significant heterogeneity in transfer strategy and postoperative outcomes were noted among the reports. All but one case report demonstrated recovery of at least Medical Research Council grade 3/5 strength in recipient muscle groups; however, there was greater variation in the results of larger case series. The best, most consistent outcomes were demonstrated for restoration of wrist/finger extension and elbow extension.CONCLUSIONSMotor nerve transfers are a promising treatment option to restore upper-extremity function after SCI. Flexor reinnervation strategies show variable treatment effect sizes; however, extensor reinnervation may provide more consistent, meaningful recovery. Despite numerous published case reports describing good patient outcomes with nerve transfers, there remains a paucity in the literature regarding optimal timing and long-term clinical outcomes with these procedures.

scholarly journals Innervation Patterns of the Pronator Teres Muscle and Their Possible Role in Neurotization: A Systematic Review of Cadaveric Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 77-84
Author(s):  
Bhagath Kumar Potu ◽  
M. V. Ravishankar
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Systematic Literature Search ◽  
Pronator Teres ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Search Terms ◽  
Cochrane Reviews ◽  
Branching Patterns ◽  
Innervation Patterns ◽  
The Mean

Background: Contrary to the classic anatomical description, many recent studies have reported wide variations in branching patterns and location of motor branches that are supplying the pronator teres muscle. To understand these variations and their implications in surgical procedures of the nerve transfers, a systematic review was performed on the innervation of pronator teres muscle from cadaveric studies.Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in databases such as Medline, PubMed, Google Scholar, SciELO, ScienceDirect, Cochrane reviews and orthopedics textbooks using the search terms “pronator teres nerve branches”; AND “number” OR “location” OR “length” OR “diameter” yielded 545 article links. Articles were evaluated according to PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of twenty cadaveric studies including 648 branches have registered 52.9% of two branch innervation pattern followed by 31.3%-single branch pattern; 13.5%-three branch pattern; 1.7%-four branch pattern, and 0.4%-five branch patterns, respectively. Of the 403 branches studied for their location in relation with the humeral intercondylar line, most branches were located distal to the line (50.3%), followed by 32.7% (proximal to it) and 16.8% at the line, respectively. The distance of branches located proximal and distal to humeral intercondylar line was in the range of 1.25–10 cm, and 1.1–7.5 cm, respectively. The mean length and diameter of nerves reported were 4.37 ± 2.43 cm, and 1.5 mm, respectively. Conclusions: Our data defined the morphometrics of nerve branches and they often met the required diameter for neurotization procedures. Our findings also demonstrated that the morphometrics, branching pattern and their location vary between populations and this information is very vital for surgeons during the nerve transfers.

Clinical Experience with End-to-Side Nerve Transfer

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 438-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. PIENAAR ◽  
M. C. SWAN ◽  
W. DE JAGER ◽  
M. SOLOMONS
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Mean Delay ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Lesions ◽  
Objective Evidence ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Protective Sensation ◽  
Lost To Follow Up

A retrospective study was undertaken to determine the effectiveness of end-to-side nerve transfer. Twenty patients with peripheral nerve lesions of varying aetiology underwent 23 end-to-side nerve transfers over a 15-month period. The mean patient age was 30 years and 18 were male. The mean delay in presentation was 2.4 months. All underwent end-to-side nerve repairs and were reviewed in outpatients at regular intervals. Ten patients were lost to follow-up before 12 months and were therefore excluded from the study. The remaining ten patients, who had undergone 13 end-to-side procedures, had a mean follow-up period of 16 months. None demonstrated objective evidence of motor recovery at the end of the study period. Four patients had modest recovery of deep protective sensation, and two patients suffered a subtle degree of ”donor“ nerve morbidity. We have abandoned this technique in our centre in preference for standard nerve grafting techniques.

Clinical Outcomes of Nerve Transfers in Peroneal Nerve Palsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (01) ◽  
pp. 057-065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linden Head ◽  
Katie Hicks ◽  
Gerald Wolff ◽  
Kirsty Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peroneal Nerve ◽  
Nerve Palsy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Ankle Dorsiflexion ◽  
Peroneal Nerve Palsy ◽  
Time To Surgery ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
The Mean

Background Given the unsatisfactory outcomes with traditional treatments, there is growing interest in nerve transfers to reestablish ankle dorsiflexion in peroneal nerve palsy. The objective of this work was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the primary literature to assess the effectiveness of nerve transfer surgery in restoring ankle dorsiflexion in patients with peroneal nerve palsy. Methods Methodology was registered with PROSPERO, and PRISMA guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. English studies investigating outcomes of nerve transfers in peroneal nerve palsy were included. Two reviewers completed screening and extraction. Methodological quality was evaluated with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results Literature search identified 108 unique articles. Following screening, 14 full-text articles were reviewed. Four retrospective case series met inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Overall, 41 patients underwent nerve transfer for peroneal nerve palsy. The mean age of the patients was 36.1 years, mean time to surgery was 6.3 months, and the mean follow-up period was 19.0 months. Donor nerve was either tibial (n = 36) or superficial peroneal branches/fascicles (n = 5). Recipient nerve was either deep peroneal (n = 24) or tibialis anterior branch (n = 17). Postoperative ankle dorsiflexion strength demonstrated a bimodal distribution with a mean Medical Research Council of 2.1. There were no significant differences in dorsiflexion strength between injury sites (p = 0.491), injury mechanisms (p = 0.125), donor (p = 0.066), or recipient nerves (p = 0.496). There were no significant correlations between dorsiflexion strength and patient age (p = 0.094) or time to surgery (p = 0.493). Conclusions There is variability in dorsiflexion strength following nerve transfer in peroneal nerve palsy, whereby there appear to be responders and non-responders. Further studies are needed to better define appropriate patient selection and the role of nerve transfers in the management of peroneal nerve palsy.

Nerve Reconstruction and Tendon Transfers for Treatment of Brachial Plexus Injuries

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Dy ◽  
David M. Brogan ◽  
Martin I. Boyer ◽  
Carol B. Loeb ◽  
Jerome T. Loeb
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Nerve Reconstruction ◽  
Reconstructive Procedures ◽  
Tendon Transfers ◽  
Neurologic Recovery ◽  
Nerve Transfers

The complexity of each brachial plexus injury (BPI) pattern and physiologic limitations of nerve regeneration create challenges for BPI patients and their surgeons. Detailed assessment via physical examination, electrodiagnostic studies, and advanced imaging can aid the surgeon in predicting the prognosis for each patient’s neurologic recovery and provide an outline for reconstructive priorities. Surgical exploration of the brachial plexus confirms the injury pattern and guides the overall treatment strategies. A multimodal reconstructive strategy including nerve grafting, extraplexal nerve transfers, distal intraplexal nerve transfers, and free-functioning muscle transfers is designed for each patient to accomplish the goals of providing a pain-free helper hand. Additional reconstructive procedures such as tendon transfers and selective joint arthrodeses are used after the results of the initial reconstructive efforts have been declared. Beyond the neurologic components of BPI, the surgeon must be attuned to the social and psychological sequelae of this devastating injury.  This review contains 10 figures, 1 table, and 60 references. Key Words: brachial plexus injury, elbow flexion, free-functioning muscle transfer, nerve grafting, nerve transfer, reconstruction, shoulder abduction, , tendon transfer

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document