Recovery of shoulder abduction in traumatic brachial plexus palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of nerve transfer versus nerve graft

Assessment, patient selection, and rehabilitation of nerve transfers

Peripheral nerve injuries are common and can have a devastating effect on physical, psychological, and socioeconomic wellbeing. Peripheral nerve transfers have become the standard of care for many types of peripheral nerve injury due to their superior outcomes relative to conventional techniques. As the indications for, and use of, nerve transfers expand, the importance of pre-operative assessment and post-operative optimization increases. There are two principal advantages of nerve transfers: (1) their ability to shorten the time to reinnervation of muscles undergoing denervation because of peripheral nerve injury; and (2) their specificity in ensuring proximal motor and sensory axons are directed towards appropriate motor and sensory targets. Compared to conventional nerve grafting, nerve transfers offer opportunities to reinnervate muscles affected by cervical spinal cord injury and to augment natural reinnervation potential for very proximal injuries. This article provides a narrative review of the current scientific knowledge and clinical understanding of nerve transfers including peripheral nerve injury assessment and pre- and post-operative electrodiagnostic testing, adjuvant therapies, and post-operative rehabilitation for optimizing nerve transfer outcomes.

Comparison of Anterior vs. Dorsal Approach for Spinal Accessory to Suprascapular Nerve Transfer in Patients With a Brachial Plexus Injury and Its Outcome on Shoulder Function

Background

Brachial plexus injuries are frequently encountered in the domain of plastic surgery, mostly secondary to road traffic accidents, gunshot injuries, or falls from a height. Many modalities have been described in the management, depending on the level and duration of the injury. C5, C6 and C5, C6, C7 are two common patterns in which nerve repair and transfers are described. At our center, we practice spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer in all patients with upper trunk brachial plexus injury. There are two described approaches for the spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve transfer, i.e. anterior or dorsal. The rationale for doing the posterior approach is that this approach avoids damaging the suprascapular nerve at its entrance in the suprascapular notch under the suprascapular ligament during exploration due to traction.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective study with a consecutive sampling of 23 patients presenting at Liaquat National Hospital, Karachi, with upper trunk brachial plexus injuries during the time period from January 2016 to December 2017, i.e. two years. We divided these 23 patients into two groups, one with the anterior approach and the other with a dorsal approach for spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer for shoulder abduction. The mean duration of post-surgical follow-up was from 18 to 24 months and recovery and functional outcomes were assessed.

Results

Out of the 23 patients that were included, 10 patients were operated on with an anterior approach and 13 with a posterior approach. Fifty percent (50%) of patients operated with the anterior approach and 84% of patients with the posterior showed the best motor grade recovery of M4, respectively, with better performance in patients with the posterior approach as compared to the anterior approach.

Conclusion

We advocate taking a posterior approach for spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer for shoulder abduction, as it has shown better results with reliable outcomes concerning shoulder abduction, angle of abduction, and range of motion.

Functional outcome of contralateral C7 nerve transfer combined with free functional gracilis transplantation to repair total brachial plexus avulsion: a report of thirty-nine cases

Purpose

Treatment of total brachial plexus avulsion (TBPA) is a challenge in the clinic, especially the restoration of hand function. The current main surgical order is from proximal to distal joints. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the outcomes of “distal to proximal” surgical method.

Methods

Thirty-nine patients underwent contralateral C7 (CC7) nerve transfer to directly repair the lower trunk (CC7-LT) and phrenic nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve (PN-SSN) during the first stage, followed by free functional gracilis transplantation (FFGT) for elbow flexion and finger extension. Muscle strength of upper limb, degree of shoulder abduction and elbow flexion, and Semmes–Weinstein monofilament test and static two-point discrimination of the hand were examined according to the modified British Medical Research Council (mBMRC) scoring system.

Results

The results showed that motor recovery reached a level of M3 + or greater in 66.7% of patients for shoulder abduction, 87.2% of patients for elbow flexion, 48.7% of patients for finger extension, and 25.6% of patients for finger flexion. The mean shoulder abduction angle was 45.5° (range 0–90°), and the average elbow flexion angle was 107.2° (range 0–142°), with 2.5 kg average flexion strength (range 0.5–5 kg). In addition, protective sensibility (≥ S2) was found to be achieved in 71.8% of patients.

Conclusion

In reconstruction of TBPA, CC7 transfer combined with free functional gracilis transplantation is an available treatment method. It could help patients regain shoulder joint stability and the function of elbow flexion and finger extension and, more importantly, provide finger sensation and partial finger flexion function. However, the pick-up function was unsatisfied, which needed additional surgery.

Possible donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstruction in dual neurotization for restoring shoulder abduction in brachial plexus injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Restoring shoulder abduction is one of the main priorities in the surgical treatment of brachial plexus injuries. Double nerve transfer to the axillary nerve and suprascapular nerve is widely used and considered the best option. The most common donor nerve for the suprascapular nerve is the spinal accessory nerve. However, donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstructions vary and it is still unclear which donor nerve has the best outcome. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review on reconstructions of suprascapular and axillary nerves and to perform a meta-analysis investigating the outcomes of different donor nerves on axillary nerve reconstructions. We conducted a systematic search of English literature from March 2001 to December 2020 following PRISMA guidelines. Two outcomes were assessed, abduction strength using the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale and range of motion (ROM). Twenty-two studies describing the use of donor nerves met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Donor nerves investigated included the radial nerve, intercostal nerves, medial pectoral nerve, ulnar nerve fascicle, median nerve fascicle and the lower subscapular nerve. Fifteen studies that investigated the radial and intercostal nerves met the inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. We found no statistically significant difference between either of these nerves in the abduction strength according to MRC score (radial nerve 3.66 ± 1.02 vs intercostal nerves 3.48 ± 0.64, p = 0.086). However, the difference in ROM was statistically significant (radial nerve 106.33 ± 39.01 vs. intercostal nerve 80.42 ± 24.9, p < 0.001). Our findings support using a branch of the radial nerve for the triceps muscle as a donor for axillary nerve reconstruction when possible. Intercostal nerves can be used in cases of total brachial plexus injury or involvement of the C7 root or posterior fascicle. Other promising methods need to be studied more thoroughly in order to validate and compare their results with the more commonly used methods.

Management of Adult Brachial Plexus Injuries

Adult brachial plexus injuries result in profound functional deficits, debilitating pain, substantial mental health implications, and extensive economic impacts. Their initial evaluation includes a detailed physical examination, electrodiagnostic studies, advanced imaging, and patient counseling. A team-based approach, led by a peripheral nerve surgeon and including hand therapists, electrodiagnosticians, mental health experts, and pain-management specialists, is used to provide optimal longitudinal care during the lengthy recovery process. The options for the surgical management of brachial plexus injuries include exploration, neurolysis, nerve grafting, nerve transfer, free functional muscle transfer, tendon transfer, arthrodesis, and amputation. When treated within 6 months, the outcomes are favorable for the restoration of essential shoulder and elbow function. Free functional muscle transfer is a powerful tool to address elbow flexion and rudimentary grasp in both primary and delayed settings. The restoration of hand function remains a challenge for patients with complete brachial plexus injury. The purpose of this review is to summarize foundational concepts in diagnosis and management, discuss current trends and controversial topics, and address areas for future investigation.

Approach to the Pan-brachial Plexus Injury: Variation in Surgical Strategies among Surgeons

Treatment of pan-brachial plexus injuries has evolved significantly over the past 2 decades, with refinement and introduction of new surgical techniques, particularly free functional muscle transfer. The extent to which contemporary brachial plexus surgeons utilize various techniques as part of their treatment algorithm for pan-plexus injuries and the rationale underlying these choices remain largely unknown.

Methods

A case scenario was posed to 12 brachial plexus surgeons during semi-structured qualitative interviews. The case involved a young patient presenting 6 weeks after a pan-plexus injury from a motorcycle accident. Surgeons were asked to formulate a treatment plan. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify commonalities and variation in approach to treatment.

Results

For shoulder function, the majority of surgeons would graft from a viable C5 nerve root, if possible, though the chosen target varied. Two-thirds of the surgeons would address elbow flexion with nerve transfers, though half would combine this with a free functional muscle transfer to increase elbow flexion strength. Free functional muscle transfer was the technique of choice to restore finger flexion. Finger extension, intrinsic function, and sensation were not prioritized.

Conclusions

Our study sheds light on current trends in the approach to pan-plexus injuries in the U.S. and identifies areas of variability that would benefit from future study. The optimal shoulder target and the role for grafting to the MCN for elbow flexion merit further investigation. The role of FFMT plays an increasingly prominent role in treatment algorithms.