The Double Fascicular Nerve Transfer for Restoration of Elbow Flexion

2011 ◽  
Vol 68 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. ons64-ons67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles P Toussaint ◽  
Eric L Zager
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Nerve Repair ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Biceps Muscle ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Brachialis Muscle ◽  
Nerve Fascicle

Abstract BACKGROUND: Injuries to the upper trunk of the brachial plexus are debilitating, affecting primarily shoulder abduction and elbow flexion. Treatment is aimed at restoring shoulder stabilization, shoulder abduction, and elbow flexion and may be accomplished by nerve grafting, nerve transfer, or functional muscular transfer. OBJECTIVE: To describe the double fascicular nerve transfer with the goal of restoring elbow flexion. METHODS: The double fascicular nerve transfer involves transferring an ulnar nerve fascicle to the musculocutaneous nerve innervating the biceps muscle and a median nerve fascicle transfer to a branch of musculocutaneous nerve supplying the brachialis muscle. RESULTS: The double fascicular nerve transfer is effective in restoring elbow flexion after severe upper-trunk brachial plexus injuries. CONCLUSION: Advantages of this procedure are that the nerve repair is done very close to the target muscle for reinnervation, so time to reinnervation is minimized, and the surgery takes place distal to the site of injury in nontraumatized tissue.

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.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Nerve Transfer and Nerve Repair for the Treatment of Adult Upper Brachial Plexus Injury

Neurosurgery ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynda J.-S. Yang ◽  
Kate W.-C. Chang ◽  
Kevin C. Chung
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Scale Score ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Nerve Repair ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Reconstruction ◽  
Operative Exploration ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Nerve reconstruction for upper brachial plexus injury consists of nerve repair and/or transfer. Current literature lacks evidence supporting a preferred surgical treatment for adults with such injury involving shoulder and elbow function. We systematically reviewed the literature published from January 1990 to February 2011 using multiple databases to search the following: brachial plexus and graft, repair, reconstruction, nerve transfer, neurotization. Of 1360 articles initially identified, 33 were included in analysis, with 23 nerve transfer (399 patients), 6 nerve repair (99 patients), and 4 nerve transfer + proximal repair (117 patients) citations (mean preoperative interval, 6 ± 1.9 months). For shoulder abduction, no significant difference was found in the rates ratio (comparative probabilities of event occurrence) among the 3 methods to achieve a Medical Research Council (MRC) scale score of 3 or higher or a score of 4 or higher. For elbow flexion, the rates ratio for nerve transfer vs nerve repair to achieve an MRC scale score of 3 was 1.46 (P = .03); for nerve transfer vs nerve transfer + proximal repair to achieve an MRC scale score of 3 was 1.45 (P = .02) and an MRC scale score of 4 was 1.47 (P = .05). Therefore, for elbow flexion recovery, nerve transfer is somewhat more effective than nerve repair; however, no particular reconstruction strategy was found to be superior to recover shoulder abduction. When considering nerve reconstruction strategies, our findings do not support the sole use of nerve transfer in upper brachial plexus injury without operative exploration to provide a clear understanding of the pathoanatomy. Supraclavicular brachial plexus exploration plays an important role in developing individual surgical strategies, and nerve repair (when donor stumps are available) should remain the standard for treatment of upper brachial plexus injury except in isolated cases solely lacking elbow flexion.

Surgical repair of brachial plexus injury: a multinational survey of experienced peripheral nerve surgeons

2004 ◽  
Vol 101 (3) ◽  
pp. 365-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan J. Belzberg ◽  
Michael J. Dorsi ◽  
Phillip B. Storm ◽  
John L. Moriarity
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Surgical Intervention ◽  
Nerve Repair ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Brachial plexus injuries (BPIs) are often devastating events that lead to upper-extremity paralysis, rendering the limb a painful extraneous appendage. Fortunately, there are several nerve repair techniques that provide restoration of some function. Although there is general agreement in the medical community concerning which patients may benefit from surgical intervention, the actual repair technique for a given lesion is less clear. The authors sought to identify and better define areas of agreement and disagreement among experienced peripheral nerve surgeons as to the management of BPIs. Methods. The authors developed a detailed survey in two parts: one part addressing general issues related to BPI and the other presenting four clinical cases. The survey was mailed to 126 experienced peripheral nerve physicians and 49 (39%) participated in the study. The respondents represent 22 different countries and multiple surgical subspecialties. They performed a mean of 33 brachial plexus reconstructions annually. Areas of significant disagreement included the timing and indications for surgical intervention in birth-related palsy, treatment of neuroma-in-continuity, the best transfers to achieve elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, the use of intra- or extraplexal donors for motor neurotization, and the use of distal or proximal coaptation during nerve transfer. Conclusions. Experienced peripheral nerve surgeons disagree in important ways as to the management of BPI. The decisions made by the various treating physicians underscore the many areas of disagreement regarding the treatment of BPI, including the diagnostic approach to defining the injury, timing of and indications for surgical intervention in birth-related palsy, the treatment of neuroma-in-continuity, the choice of nerve transfers to achieve elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, the use of intra- or extraplexal donors for neurotization, and the use of distal or proximal coaptation during nerve transfer.

Surgical repair of brachial plexus injury: a multinational survey of experienced peripheral nerve surgeons

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan J. Belzberg ◽  
Michael J. Dorsi ◽  
Phillip B. Storm ◽  
John L. Moriarity
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Surgical Intervention ◽  
Nerve Repair ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Medical Community ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
The Many

Background Brachial plexus injuries (BPIs) are often devastating events that lead to upper-extremity paralysis, rendering it a painful extraneous appendage. Fortunately, there are several nerve repair techniques that provide restoration of some function. Although there is general agreement in the medical community concerning which patients may benefit from surgical intervention, the actual repair technique for a given lesion is less clear. Object The authors sought to identify and better define areas of agreement and disagreement among experienced peripheral nerve surgeons regarding the management of BPIs. Methods The authors developed a detailed survey in two parts: one part addressing general issues related to BPI and the other presenting four clinical cases. The survey was mailed to 126 experienced peripheral nerve physicians of whom 49 (39%) participated in the study. The respondents represented 22 countries and multiple surgical subspecialties. They performed a mean of 34 brachial plexus reconstructions annually. Areas of significant disagreement included the timing and indications for surgical intervention in birth-related palsy, management of neuroma-in-continuity, the best transfers to achieve elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, the use of intra- or extraplexal donors for motor neurotization, and the use of distal compared with proximal coaptation during nerve transfer. Conclusions Experienced peripheral nerve surgeons disagreed in important respects as to the management of BPI. The decisions made by the various treating physicians underscored the many areas of disagreement regarding the treatment of BPI including the diagnostic approach to defining the injury, timing of and indications for surgical intervention in birth-related palsy, management of neuroma-in-continuity, choice of nerve transfers to achieve elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, use of intra- or extraplexal donors for neurotization, and the use of distal or proximal coaptation during nerve transfer.

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.

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.

scholarly journals Upper brachial plexus injury in adults: comparative effectiveness of different repair techniques

2015 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zarina S. Ali ◽  
Gregory G. Heuer ◽  
Ryan W. F. Faught ◽  
Shriya H. Kaneriya ◽  
Umar A. Sheikh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Grafting ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Repair Techniques

OBJECT Adult upper trunk brachial plexus injuries result in significant disability. Several surgical treatment strategies exist, including nerve grafting, nerve transfers, and a combination of both approaches. However, no existing data clearly indicate the most successful strategy for restoring elbow flexion and shoulder abduction in these patients. The authors reviewed the literature to compare outcomes of the three surgical repair techniques listed above to determine the optimal approach to traumatic injury to the upper brachial plexus in adults. METHODS Both PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched for English-language articles containing the MeSH topic “brachial plexus” in conjunction with the word “injury” or “trauma” in the title and “surgery” or “repair” as a MeSH subheading or in the title, excluding pediatric articles and those articles limited to avulsions. The search was also limited to articles published after 1990 and containing at least 10 operated cases involving upper brachial plexus injuries. The search was supplemented with articles obtained through the “Related Articles” feature on PubMed and the bibliographies of selected publications. From the articles was collected information on the operation performed, number of operated cases, mean subject ages, sex distribution, interval between injury and surgery, source of nerve transfers, mean duration of follow-up, year of publication, and percentage of operative success in terms of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction of the injured limb. The recovery of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction was separately analyzed. A subanalysis was also performed to assess the recovery of elbow flexion following various neurotization techniques. RESULTS As regards the restoration of elbow flexion, nerve grafting led to significantly better outcomes than either nerve transfer or the combined techniques (F = 4.71, p = 0.0097). However, separating the Oberlin procedure from other neurotization techniques revealed that the former was significantly more successful (F = 82.82, p < 0.001). Moreover, in comparing the Oberlin procedure to nerve grafting or combined procedures, again the former was significantly more successful than either of the latter two approaches (F = 53.14; p < 0.001). In the restoration of shoulder abduction, nerve transfer was significantly more successful than the combined procedure (p = 0.046), which in turn was significantly better than nerve grafting procedures (F = 5.53, p = 0.0044). CONCLUSIONS According to data in this study, in upper trunk brachial plexus injuries in adults, the Oberlin procedure and nerve transfers are the more successful approaches to restore elbow flexion and shoulder abduction, respectively, compared with nerve grafting or combined techniques. A prospective, randomized controlled trial would be necessary to fully elucidate differences in outcome among the various surgical approaches.

End-to-side neurorrhaphy in brachial plexus reconstruction

2013 ◽  
Vol 119 (3) ◽  
pp. 689-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pavel Haninec ◽  
Libor Mencl ◽  
Radek Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Nerve Repair ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Deltoid Muscle ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Biceps Muscle ◽  
Nerve Reconstruction ◽  
Nerve Suture

Object Although a number of theoretical and experimental studies dealing with end-to-side neurorrhaphy (ETSN) have been published to date, there is still a considerable lack of clinical trials investigating this technique. Here, the authors describe their experience with ETSN in axillary and musculocutaneous nerve reconstruction in patients with brachial plexus palsy. Methods From 1999 to 2007, out of 791 reconstructed nerves in 441 patients treated for brachial plexus injury, the authors performed 21 axillary and 2 musculocutaneous nerve sutures onto the median, ulnar, or radial nerves. This technique was only performed in patients whose donor nerves, such as the thoracodorsal and medial pectoral nerves, which the authors generally use for repair of axillary and musculocutaneous nerves, respectively, were not available. In all patients, a perineurial suture was carried out after the creation of a perineurial window. Results The overall success rate of the ETSN was 43.5%. Reinnervation of the deltoid muscle with axillary nerve suture was successful in 47.6% of the patients, but reinnervation of the biceps muscle was unsuccessful in the 2 patients undergoing musculocutaneous nerve repair. Conclusions The authors conclude that ETSN should be performed in axillary nerve reconstruction but only when commonly used donor nerves are not available.

scholarly journals Pronator Quadratus to Extensor Carpi Radialis Brevis Nerve Transfer in C5–C7 or C5–C8 Brachial Plexus Injuries for Independent Wrist Extension

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (01) ◽  
pp. 036-041
Author(s):  
Anil Bhatia ◽  
Mahmoud Salama
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Wrist Extension ◽  
Pronator Quadratus ◽  
Motor Branch ◽  
Nerve Surgery ◽  
Extensor Carpi Radialis

Abstract Background Patients with lesions affecting C7 and C8 roots (in addition to C56) demonstrate loss of independent wrist dorsiflexion in addition to loss of shoulder abduction and elbow flexion. Traditionally, this deficit has been addressed using tendon transfers after useful function at the shoulder and elbow has been restored by primary nerve surgery. Confidence with nerve transfer techniques has prompted attempts to replace this method by incorporating procedures for wrist dorsiflexion in the primary operation itself. Aim The objective of this study was to report the results of pronator quadratus motor branch transfers to the extensor carpi radialis brevis motor branch to reconstruct wrist extension in C5–C8 root lesions of the brachial plexus. Patients and Methods Twenty-three patients, average age 30 years, with C5–8 root injuries underwent operations an average of 4.7 months after their accident. Extrinsic extension of the fingers and thumb was weak or absent in two cases while the remaining 18 patients could open their hand actively. The patients lacked independent wrist extension when they were examined with the fingers flexed as the compensatory action of the extrinsic finger extensors was removed. The average follow-up was 21 months postoperative with the minimal follow-up period was at least 12 months. Results Successful reinnervations of the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) were demonstrated in all patients. In 17 patients, wrist extension scored M4, and in 3 patients it scored M3. Conclusions The pronator quadratus (PQ) to ECRB nerve transfer in C5–C7 or C5–C8 brachial plexus injuries for independent wrist extension reconstruction gives consistently good results with minimal donor morbidity.

Transfer of Pectoral Nerves to the Musculocutaneous Nerve in Obstetric Upper Brachial Plexus Palsy

Neurosurgery ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 338-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerhard Blaauw ◽  
Albert C.J. Slooff
Keyword(s):  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Musculocutaneous Nerve ◽  
Nerve Endings ◽  
Nerve Plexus ◽  
Brachial Plexus Palsy ◽  
Pectoral Nerve

Abstract OBJECTIVE To investigate the results of transfer of pectoral nerves to the musculocutaneous nerve for treatment of obstetric brachial palsy. METHODS In 25 cases of obstetric brachial palsy (20 after breech deliveries), branches of the pectoral nerve plexus were transferred directly to the musculocutaneous nerve. For all patients, the nerve transfer was part of an extended brachial plexus reconstruction. Results were tested both clinically and with the Mallet scale, at a mean follow-up time of 70 months (standard deviation, 34.3 mo). RESULTS There were two complete failures, which were attributable to disconnection of the transferred nerve endings. The results after transfer were excellent in 17 cases and fair in 5 cases. Steindler flexorplasty improved elbow flexion for three patients. CONCLUSION Transfer of pectoral nerves to the musculocutaneous nerve for treatment of obstetric upper brachial palsy may be effective, if the specific anatomic features of the pectoral nerve plexus are sufficiently appreciated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document