High Ulnar Nerve Injuries: Nerve Transfers to Restore Function

Primary Repair versus Reverse End-to-Side Coaptation by Anterior Interosseous Nerve Transfer in Proximal Ulnar Nerve Injuries

BACKGROUND

Proximal ulnar nerve lacerations are challenging to treat because of the complex integration of sensory and motor function in the hand. The purpose of this study was to compare primary repair and primary repair plus anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) reverse end-to-side (RETS) coaptation in the setting of proximal ulnar nerve injuries.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was performed of all patients at a single, academic, level I trauma center from 2014 to 2018 presenting with isolated complete ulnar nerve lacerations. Patients underwent either primary repair (PR) only or primary repair and AIN RETS (PR + RETS). Data collected included demographic information; quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score; Medical Research Council score; grip and pinch strength; and visual analogue scale pain scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included in the study: 28 in the PR group and 32 in the RETS + PR group. There was no difference in demographic variables or location of injury between the two groups. Average quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire scores for the PR and PR + RETS groups were 65 ± 6 and 36 ± 4 at 6 months and 46 ± 4 and 24 ± 3 at 12 months postoperatively, respectively, and were significantly lower in the PR + RETS group at both points. Average grip and pinch strength were significantly greater for the PR + RETS group at 6 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that primary repair of proximal ulnar nerve injuries plus AIN RETS coaptation yielded superior strength and improved upper extremity function when compared with PR alone.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

Sensory Neurotization of the Ulnar Nerve, Surgical Techniques and Functional Outcomes: A Review

When ulnar nerve lesions happen above the wrist level, sensation recovery after acute repair or nerve grafting is often challenging. Distal sensory nerve transfers may be an option for overcoming these sequelae. However, little data has been published on this topic. This study aims to review the surgical procedures currently proposed, along with their functional results. Six donor nerves have been described at the wrist level: the palmar branch of the median nerve, the cutaneous branch of the median nerve to the palm with or without fascicles of the ulnar digital nerve of the index finger, the posterior interosseous nerve, the third palmar digital nerve, the radial branch of the superficial radial nerve, the median nerve, and the fascicule for the third web space. Three donor nerves have been reported at the hand level: the ulnar digital nerves of the index, and the radial or ulnar digital nerves of the long finger. Three target sites were used: the superficial branch of the ulnar nerve, the dorsal branch of the ulnar nerve, and the ulnar digital branch of the fifth digit. All the technical points have been illustrated with anatomical dissection pictures. After assessing sensory recovery using the British Medical Research Council scale, a majority of excellent recoveries scaled S3+ or S4 have been reported in the targeted territory for each technique.

Outcomes of anterior interosseous nerve transfer to restore intrinsic muscle function after high ulnar nerve injury

Traumatic high ulnar nerve injuries have historically resulted in long-term loss of hand function due to the long re-innervation distance to the intrinsic muscles. Transfer of the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) to the deep motor branch of the ulnar nerve (MUN) is proving promising in these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and efficacy of this procedure in our series. Eligible high ulnar nerve injury patients who underwent AIN to MUN nerve transfer were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 17 months. Data including demographics, injury details, surgical procedures, and outcomes were collected. A review of the current literature was performed for comparison. Sixteen patients had AIN to MUN transfer, mean age of 39.4 years, and a median delay from injury to nerve transfer of 0.8 months. The injury site was above the elbow in 5 cases, at the elbow in 8 cases, and in the proximal forearm in 3 cases. The majority were sharp transection, with the remaining from blast injuries, traumatic traction, and one post-traumatic neuroma resection. Transfer was performed end-to-end in 7 cases, hemi end-to-end in 7 cases, and supercharged end-to-side in 2 cases. Five patients achieved intrinsic muscle recovery of MRC 4+ and thirteen gained MRC 3 or above. The AIN to MUN nerve transfer provides meaningful intrinsic recovery in the majority of traumatic high ulnar nerve injuries. This procedure should be routinely considered, however, warrants further research to validate the optimum technique.

Five Reliable Nerve Transfers for the Treatment of Isolated Upper Extremity Nerve Injuries

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article and accompanying videos, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand and apply the principles of nerve transfer surgery for nerve injuries. 2. Discuss important considerations when performing nerve transfers, such as aspects of surgical technique and perioperative decision-making. 3. Understand indications for end-to-end versus supercharged reverse end-to-side nerve transfers. 4. Understand an algorithm for treating nerve injuries to include the indications and surgical techniques of five nerve transfers commonly performed for the treatment of isolated upper extremity nerve injuries. 5. Understand the outcomes and postoperative management of the discussed nerve transfers.

SUMMARY

Nerve transfers are gaining wide acceptance because of their superior results in the management of many nerve injuries of the upper extremity. This article presents five nerve transfers for the treatment of isolated nerve injuries in the authors' upper extremity nerve practice that offer reliable results. Indications, surgical techniques, outcomes, and postoperative management are reviewed. To maximize functional outcomes in patients with nerve injuries, the treatment should be individualized to the patient, and the principles for nerve transfers as described herein should be considered.

Effectiveness of electrophysical modalities in the sensorimotor rehabilitation of radial, ulnar, and median neuropathies: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

People with ulnar, radial or median nerve injuries can present significant impairment of their sensory and motor functions. The prescribed treatment for these conditions often includes electrophysical therapies, whose effectiveness in improving symptoms and function is a source of debate. Therefore, this systematic review aims to provide an integrative overview of the efficacy of these modalities in sensorimotor rehabilitation compared to placebo, manual therapy, or between them.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We perform a literature review in the following databases: Biomed Central, Ebscohost, Lilacs, Ovid, PEDro, Sage, Scopus, Science Direct, Semantic Scholar, Taylor & Francis, and Web of Science, for the period 1980-2020. We include studies that discussed the sensorimotor rehabilitation of people with non-degenerative ulnar, radial, or median nerve injury. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Risk of Bias Tool described in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the risk of bias across studies with the GRADE approach described in the GRADE Handbook.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were included in the systematic review and 34 in the meta-analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as low or very low according to GRADE criteria. Low-level laser therapy and ultrasound showed favourable results in improving symptom severity and functional status compared to manual therapy. In addition, the low level laser showed improvements in pinch strength compared to placebo and pain (VAS) compared to manual therapy. Splints showed superior results to electrophysical modalities. The clinical significance of the results was assessed by effect size estimation and comparison with the minimum clinically important difference (MCID).

CONCLUSIONS

We found favourable results in pain relief, improvement of symptoms, functional status, and neurophysiological parameters for some electrophysical modalities, mainly when applied with a splint. Our results coincide with those obtained in some meta-analyses. However, none of these can be considered clinically significant.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42020168792; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=168792.

Nerve injuries of the upper extremity and hand

A nerve injury has a profound impact on the patient’s daily life due to the impaired sensory and motor function, impaired dexterity, sensitivity to cold as well as eventual pain problems.

To perform an appropriate treatment of nerve injuries, a correct diagnosis must be made, where the injury is properly classified, leading to an optimal surgical approach and technique, where timing of surgery is also important for the outcome.

Knowledge about the nerve regeneration process, where delicate processes occur in neurons, non-neuronal cells (i.e. Schwann cells) and other cells in the peripheral as well as the central nervous systems, is crucial for the treating surgeon.

The surgical decision to perform nerve repair and/or reconstruction depends on the type of injury, the condition of the wound as well as the vascularity of the wound.

To reconnect injured nerve ends, various techniques can be used, which include both epineurial and fascicular nerve repair, and if a nerve defect is caused by the injury, a nerve reconstruction procedure has to be performed, including bridging the defect using nerve-grafts or nerve transfer techniques.

The patients must be evaluated properly and regularly after the surgical procedure and appropriate rehabilitation programmes are useful to improve the final outcome.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2017;2. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.160071. Originally published online at www.efortopenreviews.org