Transfer of fascicles from the ulnar nerve to the nerve to the biceps in the treatment of upper brachial plexus palsy

Comparison between donor nerves to motorize the free functional gracilis muscle transfer for elbow flexion: Retrospective study of 38 consecutive cases in traumatic adult brachial plexus injuries

PURPOSE

Elbow flexion deficit is a frequent problem in traumatic brachial plexus injuries and reestablishment of this function is the primary treatment goal. When management is delayed, or the initial acute approach fails, free functional transfer of the gracilis muscle for elbow flexion is the treatment of choice. In this report, the authors present the results of a comparison study on different donor nerves (spinal accessory and ulnar) in elbow flexion reconstruction with gracilis flap for traumatic adult brachial plexus injuries.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients with both total or partial traumatic brachial plexus injuries was carried out. Of the 38 patients enrolled, 37 were male (97.4%) with a mean age of 28.3 years. The mean follow-up period was 25 months. Postoperative function of the gracilis muscle flap was recorded and patients were divided into two groups according to donor nerve: spinal accessory nerve (SAN) (18 cases), and motor fascicles of the ulnar (ULNAR) (20 cases).

RESULTS

Twenty-six cases obtained elbow flexion strength M3 or M4 (68.4%): 0 M0 (0.0%), 4 M1 (10.5%), 8 M2 (21.1%), 9 M3 (23.7%) and 17 M4 (44.7%). The mean interval to first recorded M3 muscular strength was 12.4 months. Functional elbow flexion strength (≥ M3) had the following distribution: SAN 83.3% (15/18) and ULNAR 55.0% (11/20) (p = .086).

CONCLUSION

No statistical difference for final muscle strength was found between donor nerve groups.

Novel Uses of Nerve Transfers

Nerve transfer surgery involves using a working, functional nerve with an expendable or duplicated function as a donor to supply axons and restore function to an injured recipient nerve. Nerve transfers were originally popularized for the restoration of motor function in patients with peripheral nerve injuries. However, more recently, novel uses of nerve transfers have been described, including nerve transfers for sensory reinnervation, nerve transfers for spinal cord injury and stroke patients, supercharge end-to-side nerve transfers, and targeted muscle reinnervation for the prevention and treatment of postamputation neuroma pain. The uses for nerve transfers and the patient populations that can benefit from nerve transfer surgery continue to expand. Awareness about these novel uses of nerve transfers among the medical community is important in order to facilitate evaluation and treatment of these patients by peripheral nerve specialists. A lack of knowledge of these techniques continues to be a major barrier to more widespread implementation.

Results of Phrenic Nerve Transfer to the Musculocutaneous Nerve Using Video-Assisted Thoracoscopy in Patients with Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injury: Series of 28 Cases

BACKGROUND

The phrenic nerve can be transferred to the musculocutaneous nerve using video-assisted thoracoscopy, aiming at the recovery of elbow flexion in patients with traumatic brachial plexus injuries. There are few scientific papers in the literature that evaluate the results of this operative technique.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate biceps strength and pulmonary function after the transfer of the phrenic nerve to the musculocutaneous nerve using video-assisted thoracoscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was carried out in a sample composed of 28 patients who were victims of traumatic injury to the brachial plexus from 2008 to 2013. Muscle strength was graded using the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) scale and pulmonary function through spirometry. Statistical tests, with significance level of 5%, were used.

RESULTS

In total, 74.1% of the patients had biceps strength greater than or equal to M3. All patients had a decrease in forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in 1 s, with no evidence of recovery over time.

CONCLUSION

Transferring the phrenic nerve to the musculocutaneous nerve using video-assisted thoracoscopy may lead to an increase in biceps strength to BMRC M3 or greater in most patients. Considering the deterioration in the parameters of spirometry observed in our patients and the future effects of aging in the respiratory system, it is not possible at the moment to guarantee the safety of this operative technique in the long term.

Correlation of compound muscle action potential generated by donor nerves with the recovery of elbow flexion in Oberlin transfer in brachial plexus injury

Objective:

To study the correlation of compound muscle action potential of donor nerves with the recovery of elbow flexion in Oberlin transfer in brachial plexus injury.

Introduction:

Distal nerve transfer using motor fascicle of ulnar or median nerve to restore elbow flexion is a part of reconstructive surgery after upper brachial plexus injury, first described by Oberlin et al. However, one of the most critical influences on functional outcome is number of functioning motor axons in donor fascicle which is reflected by its compound muscle action potential. We studied whether nerve transfers with donor nerves showing higher amplitudes will yield better reinnervation of muscle and therefore better function as estimated by clinical examination.

Methods:

We prospectively studied 30 cases of upper brachial plexus injury, of which were treated with Oberlin transfer using ulnar or median or both nerves. The prerequisites were no elbow flexion and hand and wrist flexors showing the power of more than Medical research Council MRC Grade 4. Donor nerves selected either ulnar or median having CMAP >4 mv in our electrophysiology laboratory during nerve conduction study. Patients were followed up for 1 year and assessed clinically for restoration of elbow flexion, weight tolerance.

Results:

A total of 30 patients of Oberlin transfer were evaluated for improvement power of biceps and elbow flexion. (MRC) grading was done at 1 year. Twenty-seven patients had a good result (MRC grade ≥3), i.e., 90% of patients. Based on the MRC grades, we categorised the patients into two groups as follows: Group A and Group B. Group A included patients with MRC Grade 4–5 and Group B included Grades 3–3.5. We tried to establish a correlation between CMAP and MRC scores by comparison of MRC grade patients for their pre CMAPs which revealed a statistically significant higher CMAPs between the groups. (Mann–Whitney U-test, P = 0.028). This indicates the association of higher pre-CMAPs with higher MRC grades.

Conclusion:

We conclude that higher the compound muscle action potential of donor nerves, better the recovery of elbow flexion in Oberlin transfer in brachial plexus injury.

The lived experience of motor recovery of elbow flexion following Oberlin nerve transfer: A qualitative analysis

Introduction

Nerve injuries to the upper trunk, lateral cord and musculocutaneous nerve can result in the loss of active biceps contraction. Oberlin nerve transfer surgery is often performed to re-animate the biceps muscle. Outcome studies following this surgery almost exclusively focus on muscle strength. To date, no research has focused on the lived experience of motor recovery following Oberlin nerve transfer.

Methods

A focus group discussion ( n = 6) allowed participants to give their accounts of successful restoration of active elbow flexion. Qualitative analysis of the transcript identified ‘significant statements’ which were used to generate themes and capture participants’ lived experience.

Results

Four main themes were identified as being important components of the lived experience: ‘pain’, ‘patience and positive thought’, ‘functionality and daily lifestyle’ and ‘the biceps muscle’ itself. Each theme was identified to have several subthemes and constituent parts.

Conclusions

The lived experience of motor recovery is complex, multifaceted and individual to the patient. This study has identified areas where clinicians may be able to better tailor their care to the individual and suggested adjuncts to therapy have been included.

Recovery of Elbow Flexion after Nerve Reconstruction versus Free Functional Muscle Transfer for Late, Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

In late presentation of brachial plexus trauma, it is unclear whether donor nerves should be devoted to nerve reconstruction or reserved for free functional muscle transfer. The authors systematically reviewed recovery of elbow flexion after nerve reconstruction versus free functional muscle transfer for late, traumatic brachial plexus palsy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify all cases of traumatic brachial plexus palsy in patients aged 18 years or older. Patients who underwent late (≥12 months) nerve reconstruction or free functional muscle transfer for elbow flexion were included. Age, time to operation, and level of brachial plexus injury were recorded. British Medical Research Council grade for strength and range of motion were evaluated for elbow flexion.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies met criteria, for a total of 103 patients (nerve reconstruction, n = 53; free functional muscle transfer, n = 50). There were no differences across groups regarding surgical age (time from injury) and preoperative elbow flexion. For upper trunk injuries, 53 percent of reconstruction patients versus 100 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M3 or greater strength, and 43 percent of reconstruction patients versus 70 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M4 or greater strength. Of the total brachial plexus injuries, 37 percent of reconstruction patients versus 78 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M3 or greater strength, and 16 percent of reconstruction patients versus 46 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grades M4 or greater strength.

CONCLUSION

In late presentation of traumatic brachial plexus injuries, donor nerves should be reserved for free functional muscle transfer to restore elbow flexion.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Effect of fascicle composition on ulnar to musculocutaneous nerve transfer (Oberlin transfer) in neonatal brachial plexus palsy

OBJECTIVE Neonatal brachial plexus palsy (NBPP) continues to be a problematic occurrence impacting approximately 1.5 per 1000 live births in the United States, with 10%-40% of these infants experiencing permanent disability. These children lose elbow flexion, and one surgical option for recovering it is the Oberlin transfer. Published data support the use of the ulnar nerve fascicle that innervates the flexor carpi ulnaris as the donor nerve in adults, but no analogous published data exist for infants. This study investigated the association of ulnar nerve fascicle choice with functional elbow flexion outcome in NBPP. METHODS The authors conducted a retrospective study of 13 cases in which infants underwent ulnar to musculocutaneous nerve transfer for NBPP at a single institution. They collected data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics, active range of motion (AROM), and intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) (using 4 ulnar nerve index muscles). Standard statistical analysis compared pre- and postoperative motor function improvement between specific fascicle transfer (1-2 muscles for either wrist flexion or hand intrinsics) and nonspecific fascicle transfer (> 2 muscles for wrist flexion and hand intrinsics) groups. RESULTS The patients' average age at initial clinic visit was 2.9 months, and their average age at surgical intervention was 7.4 months. All NBPPs were unilateral; the majority of patients were female (61%), were Caucasian (69%), had right-sided NBPP (61%), and had Narakas grade I or II injuries (54%). IONM recordings for the fascicular dissection revealed a donor fascicle with nonspecific innervation in 6 (46%) infants and specific innervation in the remaining 7 (54%) patients. At 6-month follow-up, the AROM improvement in elbow flexion in adduction was 38° in the specific fascicle transfer group versus 36° in the nonspecific fascicle transfer group, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS Both specific and nonspecific fascicle transfers led to functional recovery, but that the composition of the donor fascicle had no impact on early outcomes. In young infants, ulnar nerve fascicular dissection places the ulnar nerve at risk for iatrogenic damage. The data from this study suggest that the use of any motor fascicle, specific or nonspecific, produces similar results and that the Oberlin transfer can be performed with less intrafascicular dissection, less time of surgical exposure, and less potential for donor site morbidity.

Comparative study of phrenic and partial ulnar nerve transfers for elbow flexion after upper brachial plexus avulsion: A retrospective clinical analysis

The widely used nerve transfer sources for elbow flexion in patients with upper brachial plexus avulsion (UBPA) include partial ulnar nerve, phrenic nerve, and intercostal nerves. A retrospective review of 21 patients treated with phrenic and partial ulnar nerve transfers for elbow flexion after UBPA was carried out. In the phrenic nerve transfer group, the phrenic nerve was transferred to the anterolateral bundle of the anterior division of the upper trunk; in the partial ulnar nerve transfer group, one fascicle of the ulnar nerve was transferred to the biceps branch. The British Medical Research Council (MRC) grading system, angle of elbow flexion, electromyography (EMG), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire scoring were used to evaluate the recovery of elbow flexion at least 3 years postoperatively. The efficiency of motor function in phrenic nerve transfer group was 82%, whereas it was 80% in partial ulnar nerve transfer group. The outstanding rates of angle of elbow flexion were 64% and 70% in phrenic and partial ulnar nerve transfer groups, respectively. The DASH scores after surgery were significantly lower than those before surgery in the two groups. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the changes of DASH scores before and after surgery. Both of phrenic and partial ulnar nerve transfers had good prognosis for elbow flexion in patients with UBPA.

Intraoperative Nerve Stimulation During Brachial Plexus Surgery: Comparison Between a Totally Disposable Nerve Stimulator and Nerve Stimulator Normally Used for Nerve Blocks

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative nerve stimulation is done routinely in brachial plexus and peripheral nerve surgery as well as in selective neurectomy in spastic patients.

OBJECTIVE

The current study compares the use of 2 different devices for nerve stimulation: a totally disposable nerve stimulator and a nerve stimulator used for nerve blocks by anesthetists.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 60 patients who underwent brachial plexus surgery: In 30 patients, we used the totally disposable nerve stimulator (group 1) and in another 30 patients, we used the anesthesia device (group 2). The cost of disposable materials used for nerve stimulation was calculated in each group. The same surgeon performed all operations, and he was asked to give his subjective opinion regarding the convenience and ease of use of the device in each group.

RESULTS

The main advantages of the totally disposable device are its placement totally within the sterile field, and it is operated by the surgeon without the need to communicate with the anesthetist. However, the totally disposable device had several major disadvantages when compared to the anesthesia device. Firstly, the disposable stimulator can only deliver 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mA stimuli, while the anesthesia device can deliver stimuli of 0.1 to 5 mA (in 0.1 mA increments). Secondly, the disposable stimulator frequently fails to operate during surgery, and this is not experienced with the anesthesia device. Finally, the cost of disposables is less using the anesthesia device.

CONCLUSION

Our center has stopped using the disposable nerve stimulator in favour for the anesthesia device.

Magnetic Resonance Neurographic and Clinical Long-Term Results After Oberlin's Transfer for Adult Brachial Plexus Injuries

The primary goal of the surgical treatment of upper brachial plexus injuries is to restore active elbow flexion. Accordingly, Oberlin's transfer has been frequently performed since 1994 and has influenced the development of other nerve transfers. However, the window of opportunity for nerve transfers remains a subject of controversy. The objective of this study was to assess magnetic resonance (MR) neurographic, clinical and electrophysiological long-term results after Oberlin's transfer. For this purpose, we performed a retrospective follow-up study. Six patients with upper brachial plexus or musculocutaneous nerve injuries were assessed; 2 were iatrogenic nerve injuries following shoulder arthroscopy or neurofibroma resection. Direct and indirect signs of neuropathy were objectified with MR neurography. Moreover, clinical and electrodiagnostic follow-up was performed and all patients completed the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand score. Mean follow-up was 48 ± 21.9 (range, 20-73) months. Mean age was 40 ± 11.3 years and mean delay to surgery was 9 ± 3.2 months. All patients were satisfied with the functional results and the median Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 21 (range, 1-57). Biceps strength was improved in 5 patients from Medical Research Council grade M0 to M4-5 and in one patient to M2-3. The donor nerve showed normal motor and sensory action potentials. Follow-up MR neurography demonstrated biceps reinnervation. Taken together, this study reports good long-term results after Oberlin's transfer. MR neurography represents an excellent, noninvasive preoperative planning tool and can be of high value in selected postoperative cases. The combined evaluation of nerves and muscles may help to indicate nerve transfers in delayed cases.

A quantitative assessment of the functional recovery of flexion of the elbow after nerve transfer in patients with a brachial plexus injury

AIMS

Improvements in the evaluation of outcome after nerve transfers are required. The assessment of force using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grades (0 to 5) is not suitable for this purpose. A ceiling effect is encountered within MRC grade 4/5 rendering this tool insensitive. Our aim was to show how the strength of flexion of the elbow could be assessed in patients who have undergone a re-innervation procedure using a continuous measurement scale.

METHODS

A total of 26 patients, 23 men and three women, with a mean age of 37.3 years (16 to 66), at the time of presentation, attended for review from a cohort of 52 patients who had undergone surgery to restore flexion of the elbow after a brachial plexus injury and were included in this retrospective study. The mean follow-up after nerve transfer was 56 months (28 to 101, standard deviation (sd) 20.79). The strength of flexion of the elbow was measured in a standard outpatient environment with a static dynamometer.

RESULTS

In total, 21 patients (81%) gained MRC grade 4 strength of flexion of the elbow. The mean force of flexion was 7.2 kgf (3 to 15.5, sd 3.3).

CONCLUSION

This study establishes that the dynamometer may be used for assessing the strength of flexion of the elbow in the outpatient department after nerve reconstructive surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1517-20.

Nerve guidance conduit with a hybrid structure of a PLGA microfibrous bundle wrapped in a micro/nanostructured membrane

Nerve repair in tissue engineering involves the precise construction of a scaffold to guide nerve cell regeneration in the desired direction. However, improvements are needed to facilitate the cell migration/growth rate of nerves in the center of a nerve conduit. In this paper, we propose a nerve guidance conduit with a hybrid structure comprising a microfibrous poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) bundle wrapped in a micro/nanostructured PLGA membrane. We applied sequential fabrication processes, including photolithography, nano-electroforming, and polydimethylsiloxane casting to manufacture master molds for the repeated production of the PLGA subelements. After demolding it from the master molds, we rolled the microfibrous membrane into a bundle and then wrapped it in the micro/nanostructured membrane to form a nerve-guiding conduit. We used KT98/F1B-GFP cells to estimate the migration rate and guidance ability of the fabricated nerve conduit and found that both elements increased the migration rate 1.6-fold compared with a flat PLGA membrane. We also found that 90% of the cells in the hybrid nano/microstructured membrane grew in the direction of the designed patterns. After 3 days of culturing, the interior of the nerve conduit was filled with cells, and the microfiber bundle was also surrounded by cells. Our conduit cell culture results also demonstrate that the proposed micro/nanohybrid and microfibrous structures can retain their shapes. The proposed hybrid-structured conduit demonstrates a high capability for guiding nerve cells and promoting cell migration, and, as such, is feasible for use in clinical applications.

[Nerve transfer between the intercostal nerves and the motor component of the musculocutaneous nerve. Anatomical study of feasibility]

INTRODUCTION

The intercostal nerves (ICN) transfer to the musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) can restore elbow flexion in complete brachial plexus palsy. The last cases our service dealt with, allowed our staff to observe two different situations. In the 2 first patients, we were able to proceed with an intraneurodissection of the MCN motor component up to the axillary cavity level, while on the third case such dissection could not be performed as high. The aim of this work is to assess the feasibility of a transfer on the MCN's motor component.

MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY

We conducted a series of 5 cadaver dissections of the MCN and ICN on the anatomy laboratory. Using magnifying loupes to perform an intraneurodissection, we were able to split the motor and sensory fibers as they stood out. It would help motor recuperation avoiding directional error on sensitive component.

RESULTS

The ICN can be sutured on the motor component of the MCN, provided the dissection is very minutious.

DISCUSSION

The intraneurodissection of the MCN up to the axillary cavity level is possible as the interfascicular exchanges are scarce there. Publications already refer to the possibility of a nerve transfer between the ICN and the motor component of the MCN. Therefore, our researches suggest that such a procedure can be considered for routine procedures.

CONCLUSION

The neurotization is one of the latest breakthroughs in terms of brachial plexus surgery. We are hopeful that anatomical researches could lead to optimization possibilities.

Outcomes of Transferring a Healthy Motor Fascicle From the Radial Nerve to a Branch for the Triceps to Recover Elbow Extension in Partial Brachial Plexus Palsy

BACKGROUND: Triceps reinnervation is an important objective to pursue when repairing the brachial plexus for cases with upper roots injuries, and a number of different techniques have been developed in order to restore elbow extension in such cases.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the surgical outcomes associated with the technique of transferring a single healthy motor fascicle from the radial nerve of the affected arm to a branch innervating 1 of the 3 heads of the triceps.

METHODS: A retrospective study of 13 adult patients sustaining an upper trunk syndrome associated with total elbow extension palsy who underwent the proposed technique as part of the surgical planning for reconstruction of the brachial plexus.

RESULTS: Outcomes scored as M4 for elbow extension were noted in 9 cases (70%), M3 in 3 (23%), and M1 in 1 subject (7%). No patient considered the postoperative strength for carpal or finger extension as impaired. There were no differences in outcomes by using a fascicle activating carpal or finger extension as donor, as well as regarding the use of the branch to the medial or lateral head of the triceps as the recipient.

CONCLUSION: The technique of transferring a healthy motor fascicle from the radial nerve of the affected side to one of its nonfunctional motor branches to the triceps is an effective and safe procedure for recovering elbow extension function in patients sustaining partial injuries of the brachial plexus.

Successful Nerve Transfers for Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy in a Septuagenarian: A Case Report

Background: Conventional wisdom and the available literature demonstrate compromised outcomes following nerve reconstruction for traumatic brachial plexus palsy in the elderly. We present a 74-year-old male who was reconstructed with multiple nerve transfers for brachial plexus palsy after a ski accident. Methods: Triceps to axillary nerve transfer, spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer, and ulnar to musculocutaneous nerve transfer were performed 16 weeks post injury. Results: At 11 years post-op, the patient could abduct to 65° and forward flex at M4 strength, limited only by painful glenohumeral arthritis. Elbow flexion was M5- at both the biceps and brachialis, and bulk and tone were nearly symmetrical with the opposite side. Eleven-year electrodiagnostic studies demonstrated reinnervation and improved motor unit recruitment all affected muscles. Conclusion: This case questions the widely held dogma that older patients who undergo brachial plexus reconstruction do poorly. Given the short reinnervation distance and optimal donor nerve health, nerve transfers may be an excellent option for healthy older patients with traumatic brachial plexus palsy.

Donor nerve sources in free functional gracilis muscle transfer for elbow flexion in adult brachial plexus injury

BACKGROUND

With complete plexus injuries or late presentation, free functional muscle transfer (FFMT) becomes the primary option of functional restoration. Our purpose is to review cases over a 10-year period of free functioning gracilis muscle transfer after brachial plexus injury to evaluate the effect of different donor nerves used to reinnervate the FFMT on functional outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective study from April 2001 to January 2011 of a single surgeon's practice was undertaken. During this time period 22 patients underwent FFMT at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri for elbow flexion.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients for whom FFMT was performed for elbow flexion met all of the requirements for inclusion in this study. Average time from injury to first operation was 12.8 months (range 4-60), and average time from injury to FFMT was 29 months (range 8-68). Average follow-up was 31.8 months (range 11-84). The nerve donors utilized included the distal accessory nerve, intercostal with or without rectus abdominis nerves, medial pectoral nerves, thoracodorsal nerve, and flexor carpi ulnaris fascicle of ulnar nerve. Functional recovery of elbow flexion was measured using the MRC grading system which showed 1 M5/5, 5 M4, 4 M3, and 3 M2 outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Intraplexal donor motor nerves if available will provide better transferred muscle function because they are higher quality donors closer to the muscle and can be done in one stage without a nerve graft. Otherwise, intercostal, rectus abdominis, or the distal accessory nerve should be used in a staged fashion. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 37:377-382, 2017.

Distal transfers as a primary treatment in obstetric brachial plexus palsy: a series of 20 cases

The purpose of this study was to examine the results of spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve (with or without axillary nerve neurotization) and an Oberlin transfer as primary treatment in children with Narakas type I obstetric brachial plexus injuries, when parents refused to consent to conventional nerve trunk-/root-level reconstruction. A total of 20 children with poor shoulder abduction and no biceps antigravity function but with good hand function were treated with spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve and an Oberlin transfer at a mean age of 5.8 months (SD 3.27; range 3-12.) All the patients were evaluated at a mean of 2.8 years (SD 0.8; range 1.5 to 3.8) post-operatively. Three patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remainder, 11 had grade 4+ power of elbow flexion and six patients had grade 4 power at 1 year follow-up; all had 4+ power of elbow flexion at final follow-up. At final follow-up the Mallet score was a mean of 15; (SD 4.22, range 9 to 20). Primary distal nerve transfers can give good outcomes in patients with obstetric brachial plexus injuries and may be an alternative to surgery on the nerve trunks

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Oberlin's procedure in children with obstetric brachial plexus palsy

PURPOSE

Most cases of obstetric brachial plexus palsy (OBPP) involve C5 and C6 nerve roots (Erb's palsy). In those cases, re-establishing the elbow flexion is the primary goal of surgery. The partial transfer of the ulnar nerve to the musculocutaneous nerve (Oberlin's procedure) is widely used in adults, but incipient in children. The purpose of this study is to describe the results obtained with such procedure as regards the improvement of the elbow flexion and donor nerve morbidity.

METHOD

Thirteen children aged 9 to 15 months underwent Oberlin's procedure. They were assessed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively using the active movement scale and also according to the functionality of the affected limb. All of them were evaluated because of the possibility of movement loss resulting from the donor nerve. We used the non-parametric, statistic Wilcoxon signed rank test (α = 0,05) method.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement in the active elbow flexion between pre- and postoperative periods. Eleven children presented functional improvement. All of them maintained negative cookie test 1 year after the surgery. We did not observe any loss related to the donor nerve in terms of wrist flexion.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that Oberlin's procedure can be an effective and safe alternative to treat elbow flexion in Erb's palsy.

Nerve Transfers to Restore Elbow Function

The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the various nerve transfer options for restoration of elbow function. This article describes nerve transfer strategies for elbow flexion and extension including the indications, limitations, and expected outcomes based on current literature.

Nerve Transfers in the Upper Extremity: A Practical User's Guide

Nerve injuries above the elbow are associated with a poor prognosis, even with prompt repair and appropriate rehabilitation. The past 2 decades have seen the development of numerous nerve transfer techniques, by which a denervated peripheral target is reinnervated by a healthy donor nerve. Nerve transfers are indicated in proximal brachial plexus injuries where grafting is not possible or in proximal injuries of peripheral nerves with long reinnervation distances. Nerve transfers represent a revolution in peripheral nerve surgery and offer the potential for superior functional recovery in severe nerve injuries. However, the techniques have not been universally adopted due in part to a misconception that nerve transfers can only be understood and performed by superspecialists. Nerve transfer procedures are not technically difficult and require no specialized equipment. Numerous transfers have been described, but there are a handful of transfers for which there is strong clinical evidence. To restore shoulder abduction and external rotation in upper trunk brachial plexus injury, the key transfers are the spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve and the medial triceps branch to axillary nerve. For elbow flexion, the flexor carpi ulnaris branch of ulnar nerve to the biceps and brachialis branches of the musculocutaneous nerve is the key transfer. For ulnar intrinsic function, the distal anterior interosseous nerve to ulnar motor branch transfer has yielded excellent functional results. Nerve transfers form a therapeutic triad with traditional tendon transfers and functional motor unit rehabilitation which, when applied appropriately, can yield excellent functional results in complex nerve injuries. Nerve transfers are a powerful yet underused tool for proximal nerve injuries, which offer hope for traditionally discouraging injuries.

Experimental nerve transfer model in the rat forelimb

Background

Nerve transfers are a powerful tool in extremity reconstruction, but the neurophysiological effects have not been adequately investigated. As 81 % of nerve injuries and most nerve transfers occur in the upper extremity with its own neurophysiological properties, the standard rat hindlimb model may not be optimal in this paradigm. Here we present an experimental rat forelimb model to investigate nerve transfers.

Methods

In ten male Sprague-Dawley rats, the ulnar nerve was transferred to the motor branch of long head of the biceps. Sham surgery was performed in five animals (exposure/closure). After 12 weeks of regeneration, muscle force and Bertelli test were performed and evaluated.

Results

The nerve transfer successfully reinnervated the long head of the biceps in all animals, as indicated by muscle force and behavioral outcome. No aberrant reinnervation occurred from the original motor source. Muscle force was 2,68 N ± 0.35 for the nerve transfer group and 2,85 N ± 0.39 for the sham group, which was not statically different (p = 0.436). The procedure led to minor functional deficits due to the loss of ulnar nerve function; this, however, could not be quantified with any of the presented measures.

Conclusion

The above-described rat model demonstrated a constant anatomy, suitable for nerve transfers that are accessible to standard neuromuscular analyses and behavioral testing. This model allows the study of both neurophysiologic properties and cognitive motor function after nerve transfers in the upper extremity.

Nerve transfers and neurotization in peripheral nerve injury, from surgery to rehabilitation

Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) and recent advances in nerve reconstruction (such as neurotization with nerve transfers) have improved outcomes for patients suffering peripheral nerve trauma. The purpose of this paper is to bridge the gap between the electromyographer/clinical neurophysiologist and the peripheral nerve surgeon. Whereas the preceding literature focuses on either the basic science behind nerve injury and reconstruction, or the surgical options and algorithms, this paper demonstrates how electromyography is not just a 'decision tool' when deciding whether to operate but is also essential to all phases of PNI management including surgery and rehabilitation. The recent advances in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of PNI is demonstrated using case examples to assist the electromyographer to understand modern surgical techniques and the unique demands they ask from electrodiagnostic testing.

Timing of surgical reconstruction for closed traumatic injury to the supraclavicular brachial plexus

While it is widely accepted that cases of traumatic injury to the brachial plexus benefit from early surgical exploration and repair, with results deteriorating with long delays, policies vary regarding the exact timing of intervention. This is one of a pair of review articles considering the clinical issues, investigations, and surgical factors relating to management of injuries to the supraclavicular brachial plexus, as well as evidence from experimental work and clinical outcomes.In this article Mr Hems outlines when waiting may be advantageous, allowing for further investigation to help clarify the extent of the injury and thus the best surgical options.

Upper brachial plexus injury in adults: comparative effectiveness of different 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.

Use of peripheral nerve transfers in tetraplegia: evaluation of feasibility and morbidity

BACKGROUND

Peripheral nerve transfers are being used to improve upper extremity function in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate feasibility and perioperative complications following these procedures.

METHODS

Eligible SCI patients with upper extremity dysfunction were assessed and followed for a minimum of 3 months after surgery. Data regarding demographics, medical history, physical examination, electrodiagnostic testing, intraoperative nerve stimulation, recipient nerve histomorphometry, surgical procedure, and complications were collected.

RESULTS

Seven patients had surgery on eight limbs, mean age of 28 ± 9.9 years and mean time from SCI injury of 5.1 ± 5.2 years. All patients had volitional elbow flexion and no volitional hand function. The nerve to the brachialis muscle was used as the expendable donor, and the recipients included the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) (for volitional prehension), nerve branches to the flexor carpi radialis, and flexor digitorum superficialis. Two patients underwent additional nerve transfers: (1) supinator to extensor carpi ulnaris or (2) deltoid to triceps. No patients had any loss of baseline upper extremity function, seven of eight AIN nerve specimens had preserved micro-architecture, and all intraoperative stimulation of recipient neuromuscular units was successful further supporting feasibility. Four patients had perioperative complications; all resolved or improved (paresthesias).

CONCLUSION

Nerve transfers can be used to reestablish volitional control of hand function in SCI. This surgery does not downgrade existing function, uses expendable donor nerve, and has no postoperative immobilization, which might make it a more viable option than traditional tendon transfer and other procedures.

The value of the tender muscle sign in detecting motor recovery after peripheral nerve reconstruction

PURPOSE

Squeezing a denervated muscle a few weeks after nerve repair produces a characteristic response in patients. This response is observed before any clinical evidence of motor recovery. We called this response the tender muscle sign (TMS) and wanted to determine whether this sign was related to the recovery of motor power.

METHODS

We studied 31 adults with unilateral brachial plexus injuries who underwent 50 procedures for reinnervation of the supraspinatus, deltoid, and biceps. Follow-up was monthly for the first year and at 3-monthly intervals thereafter. Average duration of follow-up was 3.3 years. The TMS was sought at each visit. The presence of the TMS, when it was first observed, and time to Medical Research Council (MRC) grade 1 and 3 recoveries were recorded. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of TMS for motor recovery were calculated.

RESULTS

The TMS was always detected earlier than palpable muscle contraction. It was significantly associated with recovery of MRC grade 1 and 3 motor power. The sensitivity of TMS for MRC grade 1 recovery was 96% and specificity was 100%. For MRC grade 3 recovery, it had 97% sensitivity and 27% specificity. The positive predictive value was 100% for MRC grade 1 recovery and 83% for MRC grade 3. The negative predictive value was 50% for MRC grade 1 recovery and 75% for MRC grade 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Previous studies have demonstrated the presence of nocioceptive receptors in human skeletal muscle. The reinnervation of these receptors by the regenerating axons results in cramp-like tenderness when the muscle is squeezed. This response is specific to a reinnervated muscle and cannot be elicited in denervated or normally innervated muscle. The TMS is a simple, clear, and early indicator of muscle reinnervation that is useful in monitoring motor recovery after nerve regeneration.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic IV.

Advances in nerve transfer surgery

Peripheral nerve injuries are devastating injuries and can result in physical impairments, poor functional outcomes and high levels of disability. Advances in our understanding of peripheral nerve regeneration and nerve topography have lead to the development of nerve transfers to restore function. Over the past two decades, nerve transfers have been performed and modified. With the advancements in surgical management and recognition of importance of cortical plasticity, motor-reeducation and perioperative rehabilitation, nerve transfers are producing improved functional outcomes in patients with nerve injuries. This manuscript explores the recent literature as it relates to current nerve transfer techniques and advances in post-operative rehabilitation protocols, with a focus on indications, techniques and outcomes.

Obstetrical brachial plexus injuries: late functional results of the Steindler procedure

We reviewed late functional results of a modified Steindler procedure in patients with obstetrical brachial plexus palsy and poor active elbow flexion. From 1982 to 2005, we reviewed final functional results and complications of 27 cases with flexion weakness of the elbow secondary to obstetrical brachial plexus injury, treated with a modified Steindler procedure. At the end of the follow-up, the mean active elbow flexion was 97° and the mean extensor lag was 10°. In the long-term follow-up, the modified Steindler procedure maintained good results in 67% of the cases in our series, and this percentage raised by 82% when the wrist extensor was present or restored before the Steindler procedure. There were poor results in 19% of the patients, but no major complications.

Restoration and protection of brachial plexus injury: hot topics in the last decade

Brachial plexus injury is frequently induced by injuries, accidents or birth trauma. Upper limb function may be partially or totally lost after injury, or left permanently disabled. With the development of various medical technologies, different types of interventions are used, but their effectiveness is wide ranging. Many repair methods have phasic characteristics, i.e., repairs are done in different phases. This study explored research progress and hot topic methods for protection after brachial plexus injury, by analyzing 1,797 articles concerning the repair of brachial plexus injuries, published between 2004 and 2013 and indexed by the Science Citation Index database. Results revealed that there are many methods used to repair brachial plexus injury, and their effects are varied. Intervention methods include nerve transfer surgery, electrical stimulation, cell transplantation, neurotrophic factor therapy and drug treatment. Therapeutic methods in this field change according to the hot topic of research.

Thoracodorsal nerve transfer for elbow flexion reconstruction in infraclavicular brachial plexus injuries

PURPOSE

To report the clinical results of thoracodorsal nerve (TDN) transfer to the biceps nerve for elbow flexion restoration in infraclavicular brachial plexus injuries.

METHODS

Five male patients, mean age 33 years and affected with infraclavicular brachial plexus injuries, underwent a direct coaptation of the TDN to the nerve to the biceps an average of 8 months after injury. The procedure included the transfer of a branch of the TDN to the musculocutaneous nerve in 2 patients.

RESULTS

All patients achieved M4 elbow flexion strength according to the British Medical Research Council scale at a mean follow-up of 22 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct TDN transfer seems to be a useful surgical procedure for restoring elbow flexion in patients with infraclavicular brachial plexus injuries.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Comparison of objective muscle strength in C5-C6 and C5-C7 brachial plexus injury patients after double nerve transfer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quantitative muscle strength to distinguish the outcomes of different injury levels in upper arm type brachial plexus injury (BPI) patients with double nerve transfer.

METHODS

Nine patients with C5-C6 lesions (age = 32.2 ± 13.9 year old) and nine patients with C5-C7 lesions (age = 32.4 ± 7.9 year old) received neurotization of the spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve combined with the Oberlin procedure (fascicles of ulnar nerve transfer to the musculocutaneous nerve) were recruited. The average time interval between operation and evaluation were 27.3 ± 21.0 and 26.9 ± 20.6 months for C5-C6 and C5-C7, respectively. British Medical Research Council (BMRC) scores and the objective strength measured by a handheld dynamometer were evaluated in multiple muscles to compare outcomes between C5-C6 and C5-C7 injuries.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in BMRC scores between the groups. C5-C6 BPI patients had greater quantitative strength in shoulder flexor (P = 0.02), shoulder extensor (P < 0.01), elbow flexor (P = 0.04), elbow extensor (P = 0.04), wrist extensor (P = 0.04), and hand grip (P = 0.04) than C5-C7 BPI patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Upper arm type BPI patients have a good motor recovery after double nerve transfer. The different outcomes between C5-C6 and C5-C7 BPI patients appeared in muscles responding to hand grip, wrist extension, and sagittal movements in shoulder and elbow joints.

[Recovery of elbow flexion in post-traumatic C5-C6 and C5-C6-C7 palsy: retrospective dual-center study comparing single and double nerve transfer]

Twenty-nine patients underwent single (n=15) or double (n=14) nerve transfer for post-traumatic elbow flexion palsy. Patients averaged 30.2 years, with a mean preoperative delay of six months and postoperative follow-up of 34.2 months. Sixty per cent of the single transfer patients recovered to BMRC grade M4 after an average of follow-up of 13.2 months. Eighty-five percent of double nerve transfer patients reached grade M4 after an average follow-up of 11 months. There were no significant differences between groups. Clinical assessment revealed motor or sensory deficit in seven cases, which did not cause any impairment. Patients with a C5-C6 injury had shorter recovery times and better strength in comparison with those with C5-C6-C7 injury. By restoring shoulder function, elbow flexion will be indirectly improved. This improvement can be partially attributed to the base of the arm being more stable.

Preoperative donor nerve electromyography as a predictor of nerve transfer outcomes

PURPOSE

We hypothesized that health of the donor nerve and corresponding muscle, as assessed by electromyography (EMG), could predict the outcome of nerve transfer surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to investigate outcomes of nerve transfers for elbow flexion and shoulder abduction. Motor strength was graded preoperatively and after a minimum 1-year follow-up. Preoperative EMG results were classified as functionally normal or affected based on motor unit recruitment pattern and correlated with follow-up motor strength and range of motion.

RESULTS

Forty nerve transfers were identified: 27 were performed for elbow flexion and 13 for shoulder abduction. Overall, the 29 transfers in the normal EMG cohort showed significantly greater postoperative improvement in motor strength (Medical Research Council grade 0.2-4.1) than the 11 transfers in the affected EMG cohort (grade 0.0-3.0). In the shoulder cohort, normal donor nerves resulted in greater strength (grade 4.0 vs. 2.4) and active motion (83° vs. 25°) compared with affected donor nerves. Double fascicular transfers with 2 normal donor nerves demonstrated improved strength compared with double nerve transfers when 1 donor nerve was affected (grade 4.5 vs. 3.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that a simple EMG classification that describes the quality of donor nerves can predict outcome as measured by postoperative motor strength and range of motion. Preoperative EMG evaluation should be considered a valuable supplementary component of the donor nerve selection process when planning brachial plexus reconstruction.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic II.

Reconstruction of shoulder abduction by multiple nerve fascicle transfer through posterior approach

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility and clinical efficacy of multiple nerve fascicle transfer through posterior approach for reconstruction of shoulder abduction in patients with C5 or upper brachial plexus injury.

METHODS

11 patients (aged between 17 and 56 years) with dysfunction of shoulder abduction post C5 or upper brachial plexus injury were recruited in this study. Among them, four out of 11 patients also had dysfunction of elbow flexion simultaneously. The duration from injury to the surgery ranged from 4 to 12 months, with an average of 6.7 months. The affected shoulder joints showed abduction, extension and elevation dysfunction, but the muscle strength of shoulder shrugging and elbow extension was graded to M4 or higher. Accessory nerve was transferred to the suprascapular nerve and triceps muscle was branched to the axillary nerve through posterior approach. Ulnar fascicle was transferred to the motor branches of biceps for the 4 patients involved with elbow flexion dysfunction.

RESULTS

Ten out of 11 cases were followed-up for 15-36 months. Neo-potential of deltoid and supraspinatus/infraspinatus was documented at 4-5 months post surgery. Shoulder abduction (and elbow flexion) was reanimated at 4-8 months post surgery. Significant improvement was observed at 15-36 months post surgery, shoulder abduction regained to 40-160° (mean: 92.5°), muscle strength of supraspinatus/infraspinatus and deltoid were graded to M3-M5 (mean: 4.0 and 4.1); 3 cases muscle strength of elbow flexion was graded from M4 to M5- (mean: 4.4) with 1 case loss. Shoulder shrugging of trapezius was graded to M5 in 5 cases, M5- in 2 cases, M4 in 2 cases and M3 in 1 case (mean: 4.5). All cases showed normal elbow extension and muscle strength of triceps (M5).

CONCLUSION

It is feasible to carry out multiple nerve fascicle transfers for early reconstruction of shoulder abduction by posterior approach. Patients who received this procedure achieved good functional recovery and their donor site morbidity/injury was minimal.

Reanimation of elbow extension with medial pectoral nerve transfer in partial injuries to the brachial plexus

Object

Recent advancements in operative treatment of the brachial plexus authorized more extensive repairs and, currently, elbow extension can be included in the rank of desirable functions to be restored. This study aims to describe the author's experience in using the medial pectoral nerve for reinnervation of the triceps brachii in patients sustaining C5–7 palsies of the brachial plexus.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of the outcomes regarding recovery of elbow extension in 12 patients who underwent transfer of the medial pectoral nerve to the radial nerve or to the branch of the long head of the triceps.

Results

The radial nerve was targeted in 3 patients, and the branch to the long head of the triceps was targeted in 9. Grafts were used in 6 patients. Outcomes assessed as Medical Research Council Grades M4 and M3 for elbow extension were noted in 7 (58%) and 5 (42%) patients, respectively.

Conclusions

The medial pectoral nerve is a reliable donor for elbow extension recovery in patients who have sustained C5–7 nerve root injuries.

Results of surgical techniques for re-innervation of the triceps as additional procedures for patients with upper root injuries

Patients with injuries restricted to the upper and middle trunks of the brachial plexus may obtain recovery of elbow extension via the lower trunk, which makes it difficult to assess the real effect of interventions to restore the triceps function in such cases. This study aimed to determine the impact of surgical strategies for re-innervation of the triceps in individuals with partial injuries of the brachial plexus. Patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 21 participants in whom the surgery included one technique for re-innervation of elbow extension. In this group, six different extra- or intra-plexal donors were targeted to one of the motor branches of the triceps muscle. Group 2 was composed of 24 controls in which the reconstruction did not include any intervention for recovering triceps function. The individuals who underwent intervention for re-innervation of the triceps obtained significantly better outcomes for elbow extension than the controls.

A Prospective Study Comparing Single and Double Fascicular Transfer to Restore Elbow Flexion After Brachial Plexus Injury

BACKGROUND:

The recovery of elbow flexion in upper brachial plexus injury can be achieved by the reinnervation of the biceps muscle (single reinnervation), but concomitant restoration of brachialis and biceps function (double reinnervation) has been recommended to improve elbow flexion strength.

OBJECTIVE:

To prospectively compare morbidity and outcomes of single or double muscle reinnervation in restoring elbow flexion following incomplete injury to the brachial plexus.

METHODS:

Forty consecutive patients were prospectively submitted to single or double muscle reinnervation. Elbow flexion strength was evaluated with a push-and-pull dynamometer 12 months after surgery. Hand morbidity related to the procedures was evaluated by the Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments test, quantification of static 2-point discrimination, and measurements of handgrip and lateral pinch strength in serial evaluations up to the final follow-up.

RESULTS:

Similar results for the strength of elbow flexion were observed in both groups. A worsening of sensibility, measured by using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments, was identified in 8 patients, all of whom showed recovery during follow-up. No worsening of 2-point discrimination was observed. A decrease in handgrip and lateral pinch strength was identified in 8 and 9 patients, respectively, which improved during follow-up. There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of hand motor morbidity parameters.

CONCLUSION:

The strength of elbow flexion did not differ significantly between the groups treated with single or double muscle reinnervation. Deterioration of handgrip, lateral pinch strength, and sensibility measured by using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments, was temporary, resulting in low morbidity for both techniques.

What has changed in brachial plexus surgery?

Brachial plexus injuries, in all their severity and complexity, have been extensively studied. Although brachial plexus injuries are associated with serious and often definitive sequelae, many concepts have changed since the 1950s, when this pathological condition began to be treated more aggressively. Looking back over the last 20 years, it can be seen that the entire approach, from diagnosis to treatment, has changed significantly. Some concepts have become better established, while others have been introduced; thus, it can be said that currently, something can always be offered in terms of functional recovery, regardless of the degree of injury. Advances in microsurgical techniques have enabled improved results after neurolysis and have made it possible to perform neurotization, which has undoubtedly become the greatest differential in treating brachial plexus injuries. Improvements in imaging devices and electrical studies have allowed quick decisions that are reflected in better surgical outcomes. In this review, we intend to show the many developments in brachial plexus surgery that have significantly changed the results and have provided hope to the victims of this serious injury.

A systematic review of nerve transfer and nerve repair for the treatment of adult upper brachial plexus injury

Nerve reconstruction for upper brachial plexus injury consists of nerve repair and/or transfer. Current literature lacks evidence supporting a preferred surgical treatment for adults with such injury involving shoulder and elbow function. We systematically reviewed the literature published from January 1990 to February 2011 using multiple databases to search the following: brachial plexus and graft, repair, reconstruction, nerve transfer, neurotization. Of 1360 articles initially identified, 33 were included in analysis, with 23 nerve transfer (399 patients), 6 nerve repair (99 patients), and 4 nerve transfer + proximal repair (117 patients) citations (mean preoperative interval, 6 ± 1.9 months). For shoulder abduction, no significant difference was found in the rates ratio (comparative probabilities of event occurrence) among the 3 methods to achieve a Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score of 3 or higher or a score of 4 or higher. For elbow flexion, the rates ratio for nerve transfer vs nerve repair to achieve an MRC scale score of 3 was 1.46 (P = .03); for nerve transfer vs nerve transfer + proximal repair to achieve an MRC scale score of 3 was 1.45 (P = .02) and an MRC scale score of 4 was 1.47 (P = .05). Therefore, for elbow flexion recovery, nerve transfer is somewhat more effective than nerve repair; however, no particular reconstruction strategy was found to be superior to recover shoulder abduction. When considering nerve reconstruction strategies, our findings do not support the sole use of nerve transfer in upper brachial plexus injury without operative exploration to provide a clear understanding of the pathoanatomy. Supraclavicular brachial plexus exploration plays an important role in developing individual surgical strategies, and nerve repair (when donor stumps are available) should remain the standard for treatment of upper brachial plexus injury except in isolated cases solely lacking elbow flexion.