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.

Reanimation of elbow extension with medial pectoral nerve transfer in partial injuries to the brachial plexus

2013 ◽  
Vol 118 (3) ◽  
pp. 588-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Pretto Flores
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Radial Nerve ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Medical Research Council ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Extension ◽  
Triceps Brachii ◽  
Pectoral Nerve ◽  
Medial Pectoral Nerve ◽  
Long Head

Object Recent advancements in operative treatment of the brachial plexus authorized more extensive repairs and, currently, elbow extension can be included in the rank of desirable functions to be restored. This study aims to describe the author's experience in using the medial pectoral nerve for reinnervation of the triceps brachii in patients sustaining C5–7 palsies of the brachial plexus. Methods This is a retrospective study of the outcomes regarding recovery of elbow extension in 12 patients who underwent transfer of the medial pectoral nerve to the radial nerve or to the branch of the long head of the triceps. Results The radial nerve was targeted in 3 patients, and the branch to the long head of the triceps was targeted in 9. Grafts were used in 6 patients. Outcomes assessed as Medical Research Council Grades M4 and M3 for elbow extension were noted in 7 (58%) and 5 (42%) patients, respectively. Conclusions The medial pectoral nerve is a reliable donor for elbow extension recovery in patients who have sustained C5–7 nerve root 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.

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 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.

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.

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 TRANSFER SURGERY FOR ADULT BRACHIAL PLEXUS INJURY

Neurosurgery ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 65 (suppl_4) ◽  
pp. A55-A62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olawale A.R. Sulaiman ◽  
Daniel D. Kim ◽  
Clint Burkett ◽  
David G. Kline
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Research Council ◽  
Medical Research Council ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Direct Repair ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract OBJECTIVE To review the clinical outcomes in our patients who have undergone nerve transfer operations for brachial plexus reconstruction at the Louisiana State University (LSU) over a 10-year period. A secondary objective is to compare clinical outcomes in patients who had only nerve transfer operations as compared with patients whose nerve transfers were supplemented with direct repair of brachial plexus elements. METHODS Retrospective review of the medical records, imaging, and electrodiagnostic studies (electromyographic and nerve conduction studies) of patients with brachial plexus injuries who underwent nerve transfer operations at LSU over a period of 10 years. RESULTS A total of 81 patients were treated between 1995 to 2005 at the LSU Health Sciences Center; 7 of these patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 74 patients, with an average follow-up of 3.5 years, for review. We evaluated recovery of elbow flexion and shoulder abduction. Ninety percent of patients with medial pectoral to musculocutaneous nerve transfers recovered to LSU grade 2 (Medical Research Council grade 3), and 60% of those patients with intercostal to musculocutaneous nerve transfer regained similar strength in elbow flexion. Shoulder abduction recovery to LSU grade 2 (Medical Research Council grade 3) after spinal accessory to suprascapular and/or thoracodorsal to axillary nerve transfer, was 95% and 36%, respectively. There was a tendency for better motor recovery when nerve transfer operations were combined with direct repair of plexus elements. CONCLUSION Nerve transfers for repair of brachial plexus injuries result in excellent recovery of elbow and shoulder functions. Patients who had direct repair of brachial plexus elements in addition to nerve transfers tended to do better than those who had only nerve transfer operations.

Age as a Predictor of Long-Term Results in Patients with Brachial Plexus Palsies Undergoing Surgical Repair

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariano Socolovsky ◽  
Gilda di Masi ◽  
Gonzalo Bonilla ◽  
Ana Carolina Lovaglio ◽  
Dan López
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Linear Trend ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Brachial Plexus Surgery ◽  
Type Of Injury

Abstract BACKGROUND Among other factors, like the time from trauma to surgery or the number of axons that reach the muscle target, a patient's age might also impact the final results of brachial plexus surgery. OBJECTIVE To identify (1) any correlations between age and the 2 outcomes: elbow flexion strength and shoulder abduction range; (2) whether childhood vs adulthood influences outcomes; and (3) other baseline variables associated with surgical outcomes. METHODS Twenty pediatric patients (under age 20 yr) who had sustained a traumatic brachial plexus injury were compared against 20 patients, 20 to 29 yr old, and 20 patients, 30 yr old or older. Univariate, univariate trend, and correlation analyses were conducted with patient age, time to surgery, type of injury, and number of injured roots included as independent variables. RESULTS A statistically significant trend toward decreasing mean strength in elbow flexion, progressing from the youngest to oldest age group, was observed. This linear trend persisted when subjects were subdivided into 4 age groups (&lt;20, 20-29, 30-39, ≥40). There were no differences by age group in final shoulder abduction range or the percentage achieving a good shoulder outcome. CONCLUSION Our data suggest that age is somehow linked to the outcomes of brachial plexus surgery with respect to elbow flexion, but not shoulder abduction strength. Increasing age is associated with steadily worsening elbow flexion outcomes, perhaps indicating the need for earlier surgery and/or more aggressive repairs in older patients.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document