Comparative study of phrenic and intercostal nerve transfers for elbow flexion after global brachial plexus injury

Injury ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 671-675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuzhou Liu ◽  
Jie Lao ◽  
Xin Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Intercostal Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfers

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

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

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

Elbow flexion strength and contractile activity after partial ulnar nerve or intercostal nerve transfers for brachial plexus injuries

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 818-826
Author(s):  
Dawn Sinn Yii Chia ◽  
Kazuteru Doi ◽  
Yasunori Hattori ◽  
Sotetsu Sakamoto
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Muscle Power ◽  
Contractile Activity ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Intercostal Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Forearm Muscles ◽  
Flexion Strength

We compared the outcomes of 23 partial ulnar nerve and 15 intercostal nerve transfers for elbow flexion reconstruction in patients with C56 or C567 brachial plexus injuries using manual muscle power, dynamometric measurements of elbow flexion strength and electromyography. The range of elbow flexion and muscle strength recovery to Grade 3 or 4 were comparable between the two groups. The patients with C567 injuries had significantly stronger eccentric contraction after the partial ulnar nerve transfer than after the intercostal nerve transfer ( p < 0.05). Electromyography of individual muscles demonstrated that the patients with partial ulnar nerve transfers were unable to voluntarily isolate biceps contraction and recruited forearm flexors and extensors. The patients after partial ulnar nerve transfer had significantly more activity of the forearm muscles during concentric elbow flexion than after intercostal nerve transfers ( p < 0.05). We conclude that partial ulnar nerve transfers were superior to intercostal nerve transfers when assessed quantitatively with the dynamometer to evaluate elbow flexion, although simultaneous recruitment of forearm muscles may have contributed to the increased elbow flexion strength in the patients with the partial ulnar nerve transfer. Level of evidence: III

scholarly journals Comparison between partial ulnar and intercostal nerve transfers for reconstructing elbow flexion in patients with upper brachial plexus injuries

2014 ◽  
Vol 05 (01) ◽  
pp. e12-e20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryosuke Kakinoki ◽  
Ryosuke Ikeguchi ◽  
Scott Dunkan ◽  
Ken Nakayama ◽  
Taiichi Matsumoto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Intercostal Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfers

scholarly journals The Effect of Age and the Delay before Surgery on the Outcomes of Intercostal Nerve Transfers to the Musculocutaneous Nerve: A Retrospective Study of 232 Cases of Posttraumatic Total and Near-total Brachial Plexus Injuries

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (02) ◽  
pp. 260-265
Author(s):  
Anil Bhatia ◽  
Aditi Kulkarni ◽  
Pablo Zancolli ◽  
Raul Rodriguez Martinez ◽  
Jorge Clifton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Intercostal Nerve ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Senior Author ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Nerve Reconstruction ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Intercostal Nerves ◽  
Brain And Spinal Cord

Abstract Introduction Posttraumatic brachial plexus injuries are devastating, as the brain and spinal cord are disconnected from the upper limb. Restoration of elbow flexion has been widely recognized as the primary objective of nerve reconstruction. In the absence of utilizable (ruptured) root stumps in the neck, one has recourse only to nerve transfers. The direct transfer of intercostal nerves to the musculocutaneous nerve is one of the techniques that has been commonly employed over the past four decades. However, the outcomes of this procedure cited in the literature have varied considerably. The patient’s age and the delay from the accident to surgery have been known to affect the results of nerve reconstruction operations. The authors present a study of the effect of these parameters on intercostal nerve transfers. Methods The data of 232 patients with total and near-total brachial plexus injuries treated by the senior author between April 1995 and December 2015 was examined. Intercostal nerve transfers were used for the restoration of biceps function in each of these patients. The outcomes were tabulated, and the correlation with the age and the delay before surgery was examined. Results The strength of the biceps regained was better in patients younger than 30 years old and those operated upon earlier than 6 months from the accident. The differences in outcomes were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.001 for preoperative delay and p < 0.005 for the patient’s age). Conclusion The results give clear proof of the significant effect of the age and preoperative delay on the outcomes of intercostal nerve transfers for restoration of biceps function. These findings can serve as pointers to help the surgeon in choosing the method of nerve reconstruction in a given case.

scholarly journals Outcome of double nerve transfer close to target muscle both for shoulder abduction and elbow flexion in early C5 –C6 Brachial Plexus injury.

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (07) ◽  
pp. 1442-1447
Author(s):  
Husnain Khan ◽  
Muhammad Shafique ◽  
Zahid Iqbal Bhatti ◽  
Tehseen Ahmad Cheema
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Suprascapular Nerve ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Motor Branch ◽  
Nerve Transfers

Adult brachial plexus injury is a now a common problem due to high incidence of motorbike accidents. Among all types, C 5 and C6 (upper brachial plexus injury) is the most common. If the patient present within 6 months then nerve transfer is the preferred treatment. However, there are different options for nerve transfer and different approaches for surgery. Objectives: The objective of the study was to share our experience of nerve transfer close to target muscles in upper brachial plexus injury. Study Design: Quaisi experimental study. Setting: National Orthopaedic Hospital, Bahawalpur. Period: January 2015 to June 2018. Material & Methods: Total 32 patients were operated with isolated C5 and C6 injury. In all patients four nerve transfers were done. For shoulder abduction posterior approach was used and accessory to suprascapular nerve and one of motor branch of radial to axillary nerve were transferred. Modified Oberlin transfer was done for elbow flexion. Both shoulder abduction and elbow flexion was graded according to medical research council grading system. Results: After one year follow up more than 75% of the patients showed good to normal shoulder abduction and 87.50% showed good to normal elbow flexion. Residual Median nerve damage was noted only in two patients (6.25%). Conclusion: If there is no evidence of recovery up to three months early nerve transfer should be considered, ideal time is 3-6 months. Nerve transfer close to target muscle yields superior results. The shoulder stabilizers and abductors should ideally be innervated by double nerve transfer through posterior approach. Similarly double fascicular transfer (modified Oberlin) should be done for elbow flexion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document