Single-stage surgery combining nerve and tendon transfers for bilateral upper limb reconstruction in a tetraplegic patient: case report

Quantifying Donor Deficits Following Nerve Transfer Surgery in Tetraplegia

PURPOSE

Nerve transfer (NT) surgery can improve function in people with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). However, the impact of donor nerve deficits remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to quantify donor deficits experienced by individuals with cervical SCI following NT.

METHODS

This prospective single-arm, comparative study included people with SCI undergoing upper extremity NTs. Myometry was used to assess muscle strength at baseline and follow-up. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure was used to measure the ability to perform activities of daily living.

RESULTS

Ten individuals underwent 20 NTs to restore elbow extension (donor, posterior deltoid; n = 2), hand opening (donor, supinator; n = 7), and hand closing (donor, brachialis; n = 11). Shoulder abduction strength decreased (-5.6% at early and -4.5% late follow-up) in the elbow extension NT. Wrist extension strength decreased at early (-46.9% ± 30.3) and increased by late (76.4% ± 154.0) follow-up in the hand opening NT. No statistically significant change in elbow flexion strength was noted in the hand closing NT. Spinal Cord Independence Measure scores did not change significantly between baseline and early postoperative follow-up; they improved at late follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of expendable donor nerves with redundant function to perform NT surgery has relatively little impact on strength or capacity to perform activities of daily living, even in the unique and highly vulnerable SCI population. Early, temporary loss in wrist extension strength can be seen after the supinator to posterior interosseous nerve transfer. This study offers quantitative data about possible diminution of donor function after NT, enabling hand surgeons to better counsel individuals contemplating upper extremity reconstruction.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic I.

Pre-operative electrodiagnostic planning for upper limb peripheral nerve transfers in cervical spinal cord injury: A Narrative Review

Peripheral nerve transfer (PNT) to improve upper limb function following cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) involves the transfer of supralesional donor nerves under voluntary control to intralesional or sublesional lower motor neurons not under voluntary control. Appropriate selection of donor and recipient nerves and surgical timing impact functional outcomes. While the gold standard of nerve selection is intra-operative nerve stimulation, preoperative electrodiagnostic (EDX) evaluation may help guide surgical planning. Currently there is no standardized preoperative EDX protocol. This study reviews the EDX workup preceding peripheral nerve transfer surgery in cervical SCI, and proposes an informed EDX protocol to assist with surgical planning. The PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) framework was used to formulate relevant MeSH terms and identify published cases of PNT in cervical SCI in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Emcare databases in the last 10 years. The electrodiagnostic techniques evaluating putative donor nerves, recipient nerve branches, time-sensitivity of nerve transfer and other electrophysiological parameters were summarized to guide creation of a preoperative EDX protocol. Needle electromyography (EMG) was the most commonly used EDX technique to identify healthy donor nerves. Although needle EMG has also been used on recipient nerves, compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitudes may provide a more accurate determination of recipient nerve health and time-sensitivity for nerve transfer. While there has been progress in pre-surgical EDX evaluation, EMG and NCS approaches are quite variable, and each has limitations in their utility for pre-operative planning. There is need for standardization in the EDX evaluation preceding peripheral nerve transfer surgery to assist with donor and recipient nerve selection, surgical timing and to optimize outcomes. Based on results of this review, herein we propose the PreSCIse (PRotocol for Electrodiagnosis in SCI Surgery of the upper Extremity) pre-operative EDX panel to achieve said goals through an interdisciplinary and patient-centered approach. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Surgery to Restore Upper Extremity Function in Tetraplegia-Preferences for Early and Frequent Access to Information

INTRODUCTION

People with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) identify improving upper extremity (UE) function as a top priority. In addition to comprehensive rehabilitation, UE surgeries, including nerve and tendon transfers, enhance function. However, barriers exist to disseminating information about surgical options to enhance UE function.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the experiences and preferences of people with cervical SCI and their caregivers in accessing information about surgery to enhance UE function.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study. Participants were followed for 24 months and completed up to three interviews.

SETTING

Tertiary care at academic and affiliated Veterans Administration Health Care Centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with cervical SCI (n=35) ages 18 to 80 years with mid-cervical SCI American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A, B, or C (at least six months post-injury) and their caregivers (n=23) were eligible to participate. Participants were enrolled in three groups: nerve transfer, tendon transfer, or no UE reconstructive surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Semi-structured interviews about surgical knowledge and experiences.

RESULTS

Data were analyzed and three themes were identified. First, providing information about UE surgical options early post-injury was recommended. The acute or inpatient rehabilitation phases of recovery were the preferred times to receive surgical information. Second, challenges with information dissemination were identified. Participants learned about UE surgery through independent research, medical provider interactions, or peers. Third, peers were identified as valuable resources for SCI needs and surgical information.

CONCLUSIONS

Following cervical SCI, information about UE reconstructive surgeries should be a standard component of education during rehabilitation. An increased understanding of the reconstructive options available to improve UE function is necessary to educate stakeholders. Future research is needed to support the development of strategies to effectively present surgical information to individuals with SCI and healthcare providers. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Donor activation focused rehabilitation approach to hand closing nerve transfer surgery in individuals with cervical level spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN

Case Series.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the donor activation focused rehabilitation approach (DAFRA) in the setting of the hand closing nerve transfers in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) so that therapists may apply it to treatment of individuals undergoing this procedure.

SETTING

United States of America-Academic Level 1 Trauma Center.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of individuals with cervical SCI who underwent nerve transfer to restore hand closing and post-surgery DAFRA therapy at our institution. The three post-surgery phases of DAFRA included (1) early phase (0-12 months) education, limb preparation, and donor activation exercises, (2) middle phase (12-24 months) volitional recipient muscle activation and (3) late phase (18 + months) strengthening and incorporation of motion in activities of daily living.

RESULTS

Subtle gains in hand closing were first observed at a mean of 8.4 months after hand closing nerve transfer surgery. Remarkable improvements including discontinuation of assistive devices, independence with feeding and urinary function, and measurable grip were observed. Function continued to improve slowly for one to two more years.

CONCLUSIONS

A deliberate, slow-paced (monthly for >2 years post-surgery) and incremental therapy program-DAFRA-can be used to improve outcomes after nerve transfer to restore hand closing in cervical SCI.

SPONSORSHIP

This work was made possible by funding from the Craig H. Neilsen Foundation Spinal Cord Injury Research on the Translation Spectrum (SCIRTS) Grant: Nerve Transfers to Restore Hand Function in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury (PI: Ida Fox).

Functional outcome after transfer of brachialis on anterior interosseous and supinator on posterior interosseous nerves: A preliminary report

OBJECTIVE

Traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) resulting in tetraplegia is a leading cause of morbidity among young adults worldwide and its management remains challenging. Restoring hand function in these patients must be considered a top priority with great impact on their quality of life (QOL); although nerve and tendon transfer have been extensively described, type of procedure to be chosen is not standardized and few studies have determined the functional outcome of those procedure and their impact on QOL is still poorly assessed. We report a preliminary retrospective study regarding feasibility and functional outcomes of nerve transfer procedures including bilateral brachialis nerve on anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) and supinator branch on posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) for hand reanimation following SCI focusing on the impact of these procedures on QOL.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study involving patient sustained SCI and underwent nerve transfer of brachialis branch from musculocutaneous nerve on AIN and supinator branch from the trunk of the radial nerve on the PIN. We included 11 patients (14 limbs) with traumatic SCI resulting in C4 level tetraplegia in five patients, C5 in four and C6 and C7 in one case each, with a median age of 31.5 years underwent surgery at a median of 10 months after injury; including both transfers in 10 cases and AIN reanimation only in one. Functional assessment including medical research council (MCR) grade, graded redefined assessment of strength sensation and prehension (GRASSP) and spinal cord independence measure (SCIM) were performed at least 12 months follow up.

RESULTS

Thirteen PIN innervated muscles achieved an MRC score ≥3/5 whereas AIN supplied muscles in 5 out of 15. GRASSP qualitative measure improved from a baseline value of 1 to 2, while quantitative measure passed from 1 to 3 after 12 months; the difference was statistically significant (p = .005 and p = .008, respectively). SCIM self-care sub-score also statistically significant improved from 3 to 4 at 12 months (p = .016). No complication or donor morbidity occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional performance has been significantly improved by nerve transfer procedures 1 year after surgery. Nerve transfers may represent a valuable option for the restoration of the hand function in patients with tetraplegia with minor or no morbidity.

Transfer of the supinator nerve to the posterior interosseous nerve for hand opening in tetraplegia through an anterior approach

We report a retrospective series of 44 transfers in 26 patients in whom a functioning supinator nerve was transferred to a paralyzed posterior interosseous nerve through a single, anterior approach to re-animate hand opening in mid-cervical tetraplegia. Eighteen patients underwent concurrent nerve or tendon transfers to re-animate grasp and/or pinch through the same anterior incision. We evaluated the strength of the innervated muscle at mean follow-up of 24 months (range 12-27). The strength attained in our patients was equivalent to the strength after the transfer through a posterior approach reported in the literature. Nineteen of our patients were satisfied with the hand opening procedure. First webspace opening was the only variable to correlate with patient satisfaction. We conclude that the anterior approach yields similar results to the posterior approach and has the advantage of allowing easier access for simultaneously performing nerve or tendon transfers to reconstruct grasp and pinch.Level of evidence: IV.

Toward Consensus in Assessing Upper Limb Muscle Strength and Pinch and Grip Strength in People With Tetraplegia Having Upper Limb Reconstructions

Objectives

To reach agreement on standardized protocols for assessing upper limb strength and grip and pinch force for upper limb reconstructive surgery for tetraplegia.

Methods

Selected members of an expert panel composed of international therapists formed at the 2018 International Congress for Upper Limb Surgery for Tetraplegia conducted a literature review of current practice that identified gaps and inconsistencies in measurement protocols and presented to workshop attendees. To resolve discrepancies, a set of questions was presented to workshop attendees who voted electronically. Consensus was set at 75% agreement.

Results

For manual muscle testing, consensus was reached for using the Medical Research Council scale, without plus or minus, and the use of resistance through range when testing grade 4 and grade 5 strength. Pectoralis major and serratus anterior should be routinely tested, however there was no consensus on other shoulder muscles. Grip and pinch strength should be tested according to the American Society of Hand Therapists positioning. For grip strength, either the Jamar or Biometrics dynamometer expressed in kilograms should be used. For grip and pinch strength, three measurements should be performed at each testing. No consensus was reached on a device for pinch strength.

Conclusion

This work is an important step to enable comparable data in the future. Further consensus methods will work toward developing more comprehensive guidelines in this population. Building international consensus for pre- and postoperative measures of function supports objective evaluation of novel therapies and interpretation of multicenter studies.

Nerve transfers in tetraplegia: a review and practical guide

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord injury (SCI) may lead to tetraplegia. Several nerve transfers have been successfully used for the restoration of the upper limb in tetraplegia. Reconstruction of an upper limb is individualized based on the functional level. In this study, the authors reviewed nerve transfers based on the injury level for the restoration of upper limb function in tetraplegia.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We performed this study to review nerve transfers in tetraplegia by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to identify relevant articles published through December 2020. We selected studies that reported cases in tetraplegia and extracted information on demographic data, clinical characteristics, operative details, and strength outcomes based on each injury level after surgery.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Total of 29 journal articles reporting on 275 nerve transfers in 172 upper limbs of 121 patients were included in the review. The mean time between SCI and nerve transfer surgery was 21.37 months (range: 4-156 months), and the follow-up time was 21.34 months (range: 3-38 months). The best outcomes were achieved for the restoration of wrist/finger extension and elbow extension.

CONCLUSIONS

Nerve transfer can provide a new function in tetraplegic patients' upper limbs to improve daily living activities. The type of surgical procedure should be performed based on the functional level of SCI and the individual's needs. Functional recovery occurs more in extensor muscles than flexors. Nerve transfer is a promising option in the reconstruction of upper limb function in tetraplegia.

Upper Limb Reconstruction in Tetraplegic Patients: A Primer for Spinal Cord Injury Specialists

Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) often causes debilitating loss of function of the upper limb. Upper extremity reconstruction surgery can restore some of the upper limb function in tetraplegic patients with SCI. The procedures are typically muscle-tendon unit transfer surgeries, which redistribute the remaining functional muscles to restore active elbow extension, key grip, and finger grasping. In addition to the tendon transfer surgeries, nerve transfers have emerged recently and are showing promising results. However, despite more than half of the tetraplegic patients can benefit from upper limb surgery, only a few of them receive the procedures. This missed opportunity may be due to the lack of communication between SCI specialists and hand surgeons, or the lack of awareness of such options among the specialists and patients. In this review, we provide a basic overview of upper limb reconstruction in tetraplegic patients with target audience of SCI specialists for their better understanding of the basic concept of surgery and information for patient consultation before referring to hand surgeons.

Upper-Extremity Reconstruction in Tetraplegia: A Critical Analysis Review

Management of tetraplegia should be individualized to a patient's particular deficiencies and functional goals. Surgical decision-making for upper-extremity reconstruction in patients with tetraplegia relies on a thorough physical examination to determine which nerves and muscles remain under volitional control with adequate strength for transfer. Peripheral nerve transfers, either in conjunction with or in place of traditional tendon transfers, enable providers to offer an expanded set of surgical options for patients with tetraplegia who are seeking upper-extremity reconstruction. All upper-extremity reconstructive efforts should be carefully considered with regard to their potential effects on the availability of future reconstructive efforts.

Evidence for efficacy of new developments in reconstructive upper limb surgery for tetraplegia

Nerve transfers are increasingly utilized for upper limb reconstruction in tetraplegia. We reviewed the literature for results achieved by nerve transfers for elbow extension, wrist control and finger and thumb flexion and extension. Muscle strength grading was the only outcome measure consistently reported. The results confirm that nerve transfers can effectively reanimate muscles in selected cases, with comparable strength with those achieved with tendon transfer for elbow extension but inferior strength for finger and thumb flexion. Transfer of supinator nerve branches to the posterior interosseous nerve appears to be reliable and offers increased span and better hand opening than is observed after tendon transfers. Only one publication demonstrated how reinnervation of muscles with nerve transfers translated into improved function, activity and participation for patients. More prospective studies, using standardized outcome measures, are needed to define the precise role of nerve transfers.

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

OBJECTIVE

Patients 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

Twenty-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.

CONCLUSIONS

Motor 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.

Nerve transfers in the upper extremity following cervical spinal cord injury. Part 2: Preliminary results of a prospective clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Patients 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 used to treat patients with cervical SCIs. In this article, the authors present early results of a prospective clinical trial using nerve transfers to restore upper-extremity function in tetraplegia.

METHODS

Participants with American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grade A-C cervical SCI/tetraplegia were prospectively enrolled at a single institution, and nerve transfer(s) was performed to improve upper-extremity function. Functional recovery and strength outcomes were independently assessed and prospectively tracked.

RESULTS

Seventeen participants (94.1% males) with a median age of 28.4 years (range 18.2-76.3 years) who underwent nerve transfers at a median of 18.2 months (range 5.2-130.8 months) after injury were included in the analysis. Preoperative SCI levels ranged from C2 to C7, most commonly at C4 (35.3%). The median postoperative follow-up duration was 24.9 months (range 12.0-29.1 months). Patients who underwent transfers to median nerve motor branches and completed 18- and 24-month follow-ups achieved finger flexion strength Medical Research Council (MRC) grade ≥ 3/5 in 4 of 15 (26.7%) and 3 of 12 (25.0%) treated upper limbs, respectively. Similarly, patients achieved MRC grade ≥ 3/5 wrist flexion strength in 5 of 15 (33.3%) and 3 of 12 (25.0%) upper limbs. Among patients who underwent transfers to the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) for wrist/finger extension, MRC grade ≥ 3/5 strength was demonstrated in 5 of 9 (55.6%) and 4 of 7 (57.1%) upper limbs 18 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. Similarly, grade ≥ 3/5 strength was demonstrated in 5 of 9 (55.6%) and 4 of 7 (57.1%) cases for thumb extension. No meaningful donor site deficits were observed. Patients reported significant postoperative improvements from baseline on upper-extremity-specific self-reported outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Motor nerve transfers are a promising treatment option to restore upper-extremity function after SCI. In the authors' experience, nerve transfers for the reinnervation of hand and finger flexors showed variable functional recovery; however, transfers for the reinnervation of arm, hand, and finger extensors showed a more consistent and meaningful return of strength and function.

Double nerve transfer for restoration of hand grasp and release in C7 tetraplegia following complete cervical spinal cord injury

Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) can cause tetraplegia. Nerve transfer has been routinely utilized for reconstruction of hand in brachial plexus injuries. Here, we report reconstruction of finger flexion (hand grasp) and extension (hand release) in a victim of cervical spinal cord injury with tetraplegia. We also focus on importance of extension phase in restoration of hand function in the tetraplegic case, in addition to provision of a detailed description of both operations including text, photographs, and a video. We used double nerve transfer, namely brachialis branches of musculocutaneous nerve to anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) and supinator branch of radial nerve to posterior interosseous nerve (PIN). We found that brachialis nerve transfer to AIN (for finger flexion) and supinator branch nerve transfer to PIN (for finger extension) can provide finger flexion and extension simultaneously. Brachialis nerve transfer to AIN and supinator branch nerve transfer to PIN may be an acceptable surgical technique to restore hand grasp and release in tetraplegia after SCI.

Double Motor Nerve Transfer for All Finger Flexion in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: An Anatomical Study and a Clinical Report

PURPOSE

To explore the feasibility of restoring all finger flexion after a cervical spinal cord injury.

METHODS

Double nerve transfer was conducted in 22 cadaver upper extremities. Donor nerves were the brachialis branch of the musculocutaneous nerve and the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) branches of the radial nerve. Recipient nerves were the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) and the flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) branch of ulnar nerve (ulnar-FDP). Nerve transfers were evaluated on 3 parameters: surgical feasibility, donor-to-recipient axon count ratio, and distance from the coaptation site to the muscle entry of recipient nerve. A complete C6 spinal cord injury reconstruction was accomplished in a patient using a double nerve transfer of ECRB to ulnar-FDP and brachialis to AIN.

RESULTS

In the cadaver study, nerve transfers from ECRB to AIN, brachialis to AIN, and ECRB to ulnar-FDP were all feasible. The transfer from the brachialis to ulnar-FDP was not possible. Mean myelinated axon counts of AIN, brachialis, ulnar-FDP, and ECRB were 2,903 ± 1049, 1,497 ± 606, 753 ± 364, and 567 ± 175, respectively. The donor-to-recipient axon count ratios of ECRB to AIN, brachialis to AIN, and ECRB to ulnar-FDP were 0.24 ± 0.15, 0.55 ± 0.38, and 0.98 ± 0.60, respectively. The distance from coaptation of the ECRB to the ulnar-FDP muscle entry was shorter than for the other nerve transfers (54 ± 14.29 mm). At 18 months, there was restoration of flexion in all fingers and functional improvement from double nerve transfer of the brachialis to the AIN and the ECRB to the ulnar-FDP.

CONCLUSIONS

Restoration of all finger flexion may be feasible by the ECRB to ulnar-FDP and brachialis to AIN double nerve transfer.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Double nerve transfer can be used in C6-C7 spinal cord injury and patients with lower arm-type brachial plexus injury who have no finger flexion but have good brachialis and ECRB.

Management of Upper Extremities in Tetraplegia: Current Concepts

Individuals with tetraplegia face many obstacles with activities of daily living. Although approximately 65% to 75% of individuals with tetraplegia would benefit from upper extremity surgery that could make many of their activities of daily living more spontaneous, only 14% of patients who are surgical candidates undergo tendon transfer procedures. A good surgical candidate has an injury at one of the cervical spine levels and an International Classification for Surgery of the Hand in Tetraplegia group of 1 or better, has functional goals, and is committed to the postoperative rehabilitation process. Surgery primarily consists of tendon transfers, tenodesis, and arthrodesis to restore elbow extension and hand pinch, grasp, and release. Nerve transfers and functional electrical stimulation are also options for treatment.

Nerve and Tendon Transfer Surgery in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Individualized Choices to Optimize Function

Background: Recent adaption of nerve transfer surgery to improve upper extremity function in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) is an exciting development. Tendon transfer procedures are well established, reliable, and can significantly improve function. Despite this, few eligible surgical candidates in the United States undergo these restorative surgeries. Evidence Acquisition: The literature on these procedures was reviewed. Results: Options to improve function include surgery to restore elbow extension, wrist extension, and hand opening and closing function. Tendon transfers are reliable and well tolerated but require weeks of immobilization and limits on extremity use. The role of nerve transfers is still being established. Early results indicate variable return of meaningful function with less immobilization but longer periods (up to years) required to gain appreciable function. Conclusion: Nerve and tendon transfer surgery sacrifice an expendable donor to restore a missing and more critical function. These procedures are well described in hand surgery; are reliable, well tolerated, and covered by insurance; and should be part of the SCI rehabilitation discussion.

Nerve transfer for sensory reconstruction of C8-T1 dermatomes in tetraplegia

OBJECTIVES

Absence of sensation in C8-T1 dermatome is a common finding in midcervical spinal cord injury. The goal was to restore sensation on the C8-T1 dermatomes by transferring sensory nerves with afferents on C5-C6 roots.

METHODS

A mean 10 months post spinal cord injury, we operated on 10 upper limbs from 5 tetraplegics averaging 23 years old. Cutaneous branches of the median nerve were transferred to the palm to the ulnar proper digital nerve of the little finger. In two patients, the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve was also transferred to the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve.

RESULTS

At a mean 20 months after surgery, on the ulnar side of the hand and little finger, all patients were able to perceive 19.3 g Semmes-Weinstein monofilament pressure. Nociception was restored on the medial side of the elbow, forearm, and hand. Faulty location was a common finding, but not as a major complaint.

CONCLUSIONS

Sensory nerve transfers should be incorporated into the reconstruction of the upper limb in tetraplegics. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 36:637-641, 2016.

Nerve Transfers in Tetraplegia

Hand and upper extremity function is instrumental to basic activities of daily living and level of independence in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). Nerve transfer surgery is a novel and alternate approach for restoring function in SCI. This article discusses the biologic basis of nerve transfers in SCI, patient evaluation, management, and surgical approaches. Although the application of this technique is not new; recent case reports and case series in the literature have increased interest in this field. The challenges are to improve function, achieve maximal gains in function, avoid complications, and to primum non nocere.

Tetraplegia Management Update

Tetraplegia is a profound impairment of mobility manifesting as a paralysis of all 4 extremities owing to cervical spinal cord injury. The purpose of this article is to provide an update and analyze current management, treatment options, and outcomes of surgical reconstruction of arm and hand function. Surgical restoration of elbow and wrist extension or handgrip has tremendous potential to improve autonomy, mobility, and critical abilities, for example, eating, personal care, and self-catheterization and productive work in at least 70% of tetraplegic patients. Tendon and nerve transfers, tenodeses, and joint stabilizations reliably enable improved arm and hand usability, reduce muscle imbalance and pain in spasticity, and prevent joint contractures. One-stage combined procedures have proven considerable advantages over traditional multistage approaches. Immediate activation of transferred muscles reduces the risk of adhesions, facilitates relearning, avoids adverse effects of immobilization, and enhances functional recovery. Transfer of axillary, musculocutaneous, and radial nerve fascicles from above the spinal cord injury are effective and promising options to enhance motor outcome and sensory protection, especially in groups with limited resources. Improved communication between medical disciplines, therapists, patients, and their relatives should help that more individuals can benefit from these advances and could empower many thousands tetraplegic individuals "to take life into their own hands" and live more independently.

Review of Upper Extremity Nerve Transfer in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury

OBJECTIVE

 Several nerve transfers have now been successfully performed for upper limb reanimation in tetraplegia. This study was performed to review the use of nerve transfers for upper limb reanimation in tetraplegia.

METHODS

 Medline and Embase (1950 to February 11, 2015) were searched using a search strategy designed to include any studies that reported cases of nerve transfer in persons with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI).

RESULTS

 A total of 103 manuscripts were selected initially and full-text analysis produced 13 studies with extractable data. Of these manuscripts, 10 reported single cases and 3 reported case series. Eighty-nine nerve transfers have been performed in 57 males and 2 females with a mean age of 34 years. The mean SCI level was C6 (range: C5-7), time to surgery post-SCI was 19.9 months (range: 4.1-156 months), and follow-up time was 18.2 months (range: 3-60 months). All case reports recorded a Medical Research Council (MRC) score of 3 or 4 for recipient muscle power, but two early case series reported more variable results.

CONCLUSION

 This review documents the current status of nerve transfer surgery for upper limb reanimation in tetraplegia and summarizes the functional results in 59 cases with 89 nerve transfers performed, including 15 cases of double-nerve transfer and 1 case of triple-nerve transfer.

Motor Nerve Transfers

Brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injuries are exceedingly common. Traditional nerve grafting reconstruction strategies and techniques have not changed significantly over the last 3 decades. Increased experience and wider adoption of nerve transfers as part of the reconstructive strategy have resulted in a marked improvement in clinical outcomes. We review the options, outcomes, and indications for nerve transfers to treat brachial plexus and upper- and lower-extremity peripheral nerve injuries, and we explore the increasing use of nerve transfers for facial nerve and spinal cord injuries. Each section provides an overview of donor and recipient options for nerve transfer and of the relevant anatomy specific to the desired function.

Nerve transfers for elbow and finger extension reconstruction in midcervical spinal cord injuries

OBJECT

The objective of this study was to report the results of elbow, thumb, and finger extension reconstruction via nerve transfer in midcervical spinal cord injuries.

METHODS

Thirteen upper limbs from 7 patients with tetraplegia, with an average age of 26 years, were operated on an average of 7 months after a spinal cord injury. The posterior division of the axillary nerve was used to reinnervate the triceps long and upper medial head motor branches in 9 upper limbs. Both the posterior division and the branch to the middle deltoid were used in 2 upper limbs, and the anterior division of the axillary nerve in the final 2 limbs. For thumb and finger extension reconstruction, the nerve to the supinator was transferred to the posterior interosseous nerve.

RESULTS

In 22 of the 27 recipient nerves, a peripheral type of palsy with muscle denervation was identified. At an average of 19 months follow-up, elbow strength scored M4 in 11 upper limbs and M3 in 2, according to the British Medical Research Council scale. Thumb extension scored M4 in 8 upper limbs and scored M3 in 4. Finger extension scored M4 in 12 hands. No donor-site deficits were reported or observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Nerve transfers are effective at restoring elbow, thumb, and finger extension in patients with a midcervical spinal cord injury, which occurs in the majority of patients with a peripheral type of palsy with muscle denervation in their upper limbs. Efforts should be made to perform operations in these patients within 12 months of injury.

Transfer of the radial nerve branch to the extensor carpi radialis brevis to the anterior interosseous nerve to reconstruct thumb and finger flexion

PURPOSE

To report our experiences reconstructing thumb and finger flexion in patients with extensive palsy of the upper limb by transferring the radial nerve branch to the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) to the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN).

METHODS

Within 8 months after injury, 4 patients with either a combined high median/ulnar nerve palsy or C7-T1 brachial plexus root avulsion underwent surgical reconstruction for thumb and finger flexion. As part of the reconstructive procedure, the branch of the radial nerve to the ECRB was transferred to the AIN.

RESULTS

At final evaluation, which averaged 13 months postoperatively, all patients had recovered full finger and thumb flexion, scoring M4 per Medical Research Council guidelines. Average grasp strength was 5 kg, and pinch strength was 2 kg. Even in anesthetic fingers and with their eyes closed, patients could correctly identify passive extension of their distal interphalangeal joints. Wrist extension was preserved in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In 4 patients, transfer of the branch of the radial nerve to the ECRB to the AIN predictably reconstructed thumb and finger flexion. Finger flexion also recovered in those fingers in which the flexor digitorum profundus was primarily innervated by the ulnar nerve. Despite extended sensory deficits, patients ultimately were able to use their hands regularly in daily life.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic III.

Upper limb reinnervation in C6 tetraplegia using a triple nerve transfer: case report

Restoration of elbow extension, grasp, key pinch, and release are major goals in low-level tetraplegia. Traditionally, these functions are achieved using tendon transfers. In this case these goals were achieved using nerve transfers. We present a 21-year-old man with a C6 level of tetraplegia. The left upper limb was treated 6 months after injury with a triple nerve transfer. A teres minor nerve branch to long head of triceps nerve branch, brachialis nerve branch to anterior interosseous nerve, and supinator nerve branch to posterior interosseous nerve transfer were used successfully to reconstruct elbow extension, key pinch, grasp, and release simultaneously.