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

Nerve transfers to the biceps and brachialis branches to improve elbow flexion strength after brachial plexus injuries

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 313-318
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Tung ◽  
Christine B. Novak ◽  
Susan E. Mackinnon
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Brachialis Muscle ◽  
Nerve Fascicle ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Time ◽  
Flexion Strength

Object In this study the authors evaluated the outcome in patients with brachial plexus injuries who underwent nerve transfers to the biceps and the brachialis branches of the musculocutaneous nerve. Methods The charts of eight patients who underwent an ulnar nerve fascicle transfer to the biceps branch of the musculocutaneous nerve and a separate transfer to the brachialis branch were retrospectively reviewed. Outcome was assessed using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grade to classify elbow flexion strength in conjunction with electromyography (EMG). The mean patient age was 26.4 years (range 16–45 years) and the mean time from injury to surgery was 3.8 months (range 2.5–7.5 months). Recovery of elbow flexion was MRC Grade 4 in five patients, and Grade 4+in three. Reinnervation of both the biceps and brachialis muscles was confirmed on EMG studies. Ulnar nerve function was not downgraded in any patient. Conclusions The use of nerve transfers to reinnervate the biceps and brachialis muscle provides excellent elbow flexion strength in patients with brachial plexus nerve injuries.

Minimum Ten-Year Outcomes of Partial Ulnar Nerve Transfer for Restoration of Elbow Flexion in Patients with Upper Brachial Plexus Injury

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (03) ◽  
pp. 283-288
Author(s):  
Yusuke Nagano ◽  
Daisuke Kawamura ◽  
Alaa Terkawi ◽  
Atsushi Urita ◽  
Yuichiro Matsui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Muscle Strength ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Flexion Strength

Background: Partial ulnar nerve transfer to the biceps motor branch of the musculocutaneous nerve (Oberlin’s transfer) is a successful approach to restore elbow flexion in patients with upper brachial plexus injury (BPI). However, there is no report on more than 10 years subjective and objective outcomes. The purpose of this study was to clarify the long-term outcomes of Oberlin’s transfer based on the objective evaluation of elbow flexion strength and subjective functional evaluation of patients. Methods: Six patients with BPI who underwent Oberlin’s transfer were reviewed retrospectively by their medical records. The mean age at surgery was 29.5 years, and the mean follow-up duration was 13 years. The objective functional outcomes were evaluated by biceps muscle strength using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grade at preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up. The patient-derived subjective functional outcomes were evaluated using the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire at final follow-up. Results: All patients had MRC grade 0 (M0) or 1 (M1) elbow flexion strength before operation. Four patients gained M4 postoperatively and maintained or increased muscle strength at the final follow-up. One patient gained M3 postoperatively and at the final follow-up. Although one patient achieved M4 postoperatively, the strength was reduced to M2 due to additional disorder. The mean score of QuickDASH was 36.5 (range, 7–71). Patients were divided into two groups; three patients had lower scores and the other three patients had higher scores of QuickDASH. Conclusions: Oberlin’s transfer is effective in the restoration of elbow flexion and can maintain the strength for more than 10 years. Patients with upper BPI with restored elbow flexion strength and no complicated nerve disorders have over ten-year subjective satisfaction.

Restoration of Elbow Flexion in Traumatic Upper Brachial Plexus Palsy in Adults: Outcome with Intraplexus Distal Nerve Transfers in 78 Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (04) ◽  
pp. 285-290
Author(s):  
Mario Siqueira ◽  
Roberto Martins ◽  
Wilson Faglioni Junior ◽  
Luciano Foroni ◽  
Carlos Heise
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Median Nerve ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Traumatic Injury ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Distal Nerve

Objective To present the functional outcomes of distal nerve transfer techniques for restoration of elbow flexion after upper brachial plexus injury. Method The files of 78 adult patients with C5, C6, ± C7 lesions were reviewed. The attempt to restore elbow flexion was made by intraplexus distal nerve transfers using a fascicle of the ulnar nerve (group A, n = 43), or a fascicle of the median nerve (group B, n = 16) or a combination of both (group C, n = 19). The result of the treatment was defined based on the British Medical Research Council grading system: muscle strength < M3 was considered a poor result. Results The global incidence of good/excellent results with these nerve transfers was 80.7%, and for different surgical techniques (groups A, B, C), it was 86%, 56.2% and 100% respectively. Patients submitted to ulnar nerve transfer or double transfer (ulnar + median fascicles transfer) had a better outcome than those submitted to median nerve transfer alone (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the outcome of ulnar transfer and double transfer. Conclusion In cases of traumatic injury of the upper brachial plexus, good and excelent results in the restoration of elbow flexion can be obtained using distal nerve transfers.

Nerve transfers to the biceps and brachialis branches to improve elbow flexion strength after brachial plexus injuries

2003 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas H. Tung ◽  
Christine B. Novak ◽  
Susan E. Mackinnon
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Nerve Fascicle ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Flexion Strength ◽  
Fine Print

Object. In this study the authors evaluated the outcome in patients with brachial plexus injuries who underwent nerve transfers to the biceps and the brachialis branches of the musculocutaneous nerve. Methods. The charts of eight patients who underwent an ulnar nerve fascicle transfer to the biceps branch of the musculocutaneous nerve and a separate transfer to the brachialis branch were retrospectively reviewed. Outcome was assessed using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grade to classify elbow flexion strength in conjunction with electromyography (EMG). The mean patient age was 26.4 years (range 16–45 years) and the mean time from injury to surgery was 3.8 months (range 2.5–7.5 months). Recovery of elbow flexion was MRC Grade 4 in five patients, and Grade 4+ in three. Reinnervation of both the biceps and brachialis muscles was confirmed on EMG studies. Ulnar nerve function was not downgraded in any patient. Conclusions. The use of nerve transfers to reinnervate the biceps and brachialis muscle provides excellent elbow flexion strength in patients with brachial plexus nerve injuries.

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.

Transfer of a Motor Fascicle From the Ulnar Nerve to the Branch of the Radial Nerve Destined to the Long Head of the Triceps for Restoration of Elbow Extension in Brachial Plexus Surgery

Neurosurgery ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 70 (2) ◽  
pp. E516-E520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Pretto Flores
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Radial Nerve ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Elbow Extension ◽  
Long Head ◽  
Brachial Plexus Surgery

Abstract BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Restoration of elbow extension has not been considered of much importance regarding functional outcomes in brachial plexus surgery; however, the flexion of the elbow joint is only fully effective if the motion can be stabilized, what can be achieved solely if the triceps brachii is coactivated. To present a novel nerve transfer of a healthy motor fascicle from the ulnar nerve to the nerve of the long head of the triceps to restore the elbow extension function in brachial plexus injuries involving the upper and middle trunks. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: Case 1 is a 32-year-old man sustaining a right brachial extended upper plexus injury in a motorcycle accident 5 months before admission. The computed tomography myelogram demonstrated avulsion of the C5 and C6 roots. Case 2 is a 24-year-old man who sustained a C5-C7 injury to the left brachial plexus in a traffic accident 4 months before admission. Computed tomography myelogram demonstrated signs of C6 and C7 root avulsion. The technique included an incision at the medial border of the biceps, in the proximal third of the involved arm, followed by identification of the ulnar nerve, the radial nerve, and the branch to the long head of the triceps. The proximal stump of a motor fascicle from the ulnar nerve was sutured directly to the distal stump of the nerve of the long head of the triceps. Techniques to restore elbow flexion and shoulder abduction were applied in both cases. Triceps strength Medical Research Council M4 grade was obtained in both cases. CONCLUSION: The attempted nerve transfer was effective for restoration of elbow extension in primary brachial plexus surgery; however, it should be selected only for cases in which other reliable donor nerves were used to restore elbow flexion.

Contralateral motor rootlets and ipsilateral nerve transfers in brachial plexus reconstruction

2004 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 770-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayme Augusto Bertelli ◽  
Marcos Flávio Ghizoni
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Cranial Nerve ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Contralateral Motor ◽  
Fine Print

Object. The goal of this study was to evaluate outcomes in patients with brachial plexus avulsion injuries who underwent contralateral motor rootlet and ipsilateral nerve transfers to reconstruct shoulder abduction/external rotation and elbow flexion. Methods. Within 6 months after the injury, 24 patients with a mean age of 21 years underwent surgery in which the contralateral C-7 motor rootlet was transferred to the suprascapular nerve by using sural nerve grafts. The biceps motor branch or the musculocutaneous nerve was repaired either by an ulnar nerve fascicular transfer or by transfer of the 11th cranial nerve or the phrenic nerve. The mean recovery in abduction was 90° and 92° in external rotation. In cases of total palsy, only two patients recovered external rotation and in those cases mean external rotation was 70°. Elbow flexion was achieved in all cases. In cases of ulnar nerve transfer, the muscle scores were M5 in one patient, M4 in six patients, and M3+ in five patients. Elbow flexion repair involving the use of the 11th cranial nerve resulted in a score of M3+ in five patients and M4 in two patients. After surgery involving the phrenic nerve, two patients received a score of M3+ and two a score of M4. Results were clearly better in patients with partial lesions and in those who were shorter than 170 cm (p < 0.01). The length of the graft used in motor rootlet transfers affected only the recovery of external rotation. There was no permanent injury at the donor sites. Conclusions. Motor rootlet transfer represents a reliable and potent neurotizer that allows the reconstruction of abduction and external rotation in partial injuries.

Comparison Between Supraclavicular Versus Video-Assisted Intrathoracic Phrenic Nerve Section for Transfer in Patients With Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injuries: Case Series

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 249-254
Author(s):  
Mariano Socolovsky ◽  
Marcio de Mendonça Cardoso ◽  
Ana Lovaglio ◽  
Gilda di Masi ◽  
Gonzalo Bonilla ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Nerve Section ◽  
Video Assisted ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Flexion Strength

Abstract BACKGROUND The phrenic nerve has been extensively reported to be a very powerful source of transferable axons in brachial plexus injuries. The most used technique used is supraclavicular sectioning of this nerve. More recently, video-assisted thoracoscopic techniques have been reported as a good alternative, since harvesting a longer phrenic nerve avoids the need of an interposed graft. OBJECTIVE To compare grafting vs phrenic nerve transfer via thoracoscopy with respect to mean elbow strength at final follow-up. METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted among patients who underwent phrenic nerve transfer for elbow flexion at 2 centers from 2008 to 2017. All data analysis was performed in order to determine statistical significance among the analyzed variables. RESULTS A total of 32 patients underwent supraclavicular phrenic nerve transfer, while 28 underwent phrenic nerve transfer via video-assisted thoracoscopy. Demographic characteristics were similar in both groups. A statistically significant difference in elbow flexion strength recovery was observed, favoring the supraclavicular phrenic nerve section group against the intrathoracic group (P = .036). A moderate though nonsignificant difference was observed favoring the same group in mean elbow flexion strength. Also, statistical differences included patient age (P = .01) and earlier time from trauma to surgery (P = .069). CONCLUSION Comparing supraclavicular sectioning of the nerve vs video-assisted, intrathoracic nerve sectioning to restore elbow flexion showed that the former yielded statistically better results than the latter, in terms of the percentage of patients who achieve at least level 3 MRC strength at final follow-up. Furthermore, larger scale prospective studies assessing the long-term effects of phrenic nerve transfers remain necessary.

scholarly journals Reinnervation of the biceps in C5–7 brachial plexus avulsion injuries: results after distal bypass surgery

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Ferraresi ◽  
Debora Garozzo ◽  
Paolo Buffatti
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Hand Function ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Biceps Muscle ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Normal Hand ◽  
Nerve Dysfunction

Object The authors report various techniques, and their results, after performing median and ulnar nerve transfers to reanimate the biceps muscle in C5–7 avulsion-related brachial plexus injuries (BPIs). Methods Forty-three adult patients with BPIs of the upper-middle plexus underwent reinnervation of the biceps muscle; neurotization of the musculocutaneous nerve was performed using fascicles from the ulnar nerve (39 cases) and the median nerve (four cases). The different techniques included sectioning, rerouting, and direct suturing of the entire musculocutaneous nerve (35 cases); direct reinnervation of the motor branches of the musculocutaneous nerve (three cases); and reinnervation using small grafts to the motor fascicles that enter the biceps muscle (five cases). Elbow flexion recovery ranged from M2 to M4+, according to the patient's age and the level of integrity of the hand. No surgery-related failure occurred. No significant difference in outcome was related to any of the technical variants. In patients younger than age 45 years and exhibiting a normal hand function a score of M4 or better was always achieved. On average, reinnervation occurred 6 months after surgery. There was no clinical evidence of donor nerve dysfunction. Conclusions When accurate selection criteria are met, the results after this type of neurotization have proved excellent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document