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.

Transfer of the Platysma Motor Branch to the Accessory Nerve in a Patient With Trapezius Muscle Palsy and Total Avulsion of the Brachial Plexus

Neurosurgery ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. E567-E570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jayme Augusto Bertelli ◽  
Marcos Flávio Ghizoni
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Motor Nerve ◽  
Trapezius Muscle ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Suprascapular Nerve ◽  
Accessory Nerve ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Motor Branch ◽  
Upper Trapezius

Abstract BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: To report on the successful use of a platysma motor nerve transfer to the accessory nerve in a patient with concomitant trapezius and brachial plexus palsy. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: A 20-year-old man presented with total avulsion of the right brachial plexus combined with palsies of the accessory and phrenic nerve. The patient was operated on 4 months after his injury. The accessory nerve was repaired via direct transfer of the platysma motor branch. The contralateral C7 root was connected to the musculocutaneous nerve, and the hemihypoglossal nerve was grafted to the suprascapular nerve. Two intercostal nerves were attached to the triceps long head motor branch. CONCLUSION: Within 20 months of surgery, the patient regained full reinnervation of the upper trapezius muscle. Elbow flexion scored M3+, and 30° active shoulder abduction was observed. Triceps reinnervation was poor. Platysma motor branch transfer to the accessory nerve is a viable alternative to reinnervate the trapezius muscle.

scholarly journals Nerve Transfers for an Upper Brachial Plexus Injury: A Case Report

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (01) ◽  
pp. 15-24
Author(s):  
Ferry Senjaya
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Functional Recovery ◽  
Brachial Plexus Injury ◽  
Motor Vehicle ◽  
Motor Vehicle Accident ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Motor Branch ◽  
Nerve Transfers

Objective: To demonstrate multiple nerve transfers as primary surgical management for an upperplexus injury.Methods: A 6-year-old boy who suffered a preganglionic upper brachial plexus injury following a motor vehicle accident, exhibited complete biceps, deltoids, suprapinatus, and infraspinatus palsies.Multiple nerve transfers, which consist of spinal accessory nerves to suprascapular nerve transfer, median and ulnar motor fascicles to biceps and brachialis motor branches transfers, and long head oftriceps motor branch to axillary nerve transfer were performed 6 months after injury.Results: 13 months post multiple nerve transfer, the patient has regained M4+/5 elbow flexion, M4/5 external rotation, and M4/5 shoulder abduction.Conclusion: Nerve transfer is a viable option for upper plexus palsy management. With a sound surgical technique and good case selection, the results can be very rewarding. This case showedquite robust re-innervation with significant functional recovery at a one-year follow-up following multiple nerve transfers.Keywords: Brachial Plexus Injury, Upper Plexus Injury, Nerve Root Avulsion, Nerve Transfers, Functional Recovery.

Multiple nerve transfers for the reanimation of shoulder and elbow functions in irreparable C5, C6 and upper truncal lesions of the brachial plexus

2008 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 95-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
PS Bhandari ◽  
LP Sadhotra ◽  
P Bhargava ◽  
AS Bath ◽  
MK Mukherjee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Elbow Flexion ◽  
Suprascapular Nerve ◽  
Shoulder Function ◽  
Spinal Nerve ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Nerve Branch ◽  
Nerve Transfers

AbstractIn irreparable C5, C6 spinal nerve and upper truncal injuries the proximal root stumps are not available for grafting, hence repair is based on nerve transfer or neurotization. Between Feb 2004 and May 2006, 23 patients with irreparable C5, C6 or upper truncal injuries of the Brachial Plexus underwent multiple nerve transfers to restore the shoulder and elbow functions. Most of them (16 patients) sustained injury following motor cycle accidents. The average denervation period was 5.3 months. Shoulder function was restored by transfer of distal part of spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve, and transfer of radial nerve branch to long head of triceps to the anterior branch of axillary nerve. Elbow function was restored by transfers of ulnar and median nerve fascicles to the biceps and brachialis motor branches of musculocutaneous nerve. All patients recovered shoulder abduction and external rotation; 7 scored M4 and 16 scored M3. Range of abduction averaged 1230(range, 800-1700). Full elbow flexion was restored in all 23 patients; 15 scored M4 and 8 scored M3. Patients with excellent results could lift 5 kgs of weight. Selective nerve transfers close to the target muscle provide an early and good return of functions. There is negligible morbidity in donor nerves. These intraplexal transfers are suitable in all cases of upper brachial plexus injuries.

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.

Double-Nerve Transfer to the Axillary Nerve in Traumatic Upper Trunk Brachial Plexus Injuries Using an Axillary Approach: Anatomical Description and Preliminary Case Series

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. E131-E139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thibault Lafosse ◽  
Thibault Gerosa ◽  
Julien Serane ◽  
Michael Bouyer ◽  
Emmanuel H Masmejean ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Nerve Transfer ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Motor Deficit ◽  
Motor Branch ◽  
Axillary Approach ◽  
Nerve Transfers ◽  
Teres Minor

Abstract BACKGROUND Restoration of shoulder external rotation remains challenging in patients with C5/C6 brachial plexus injuries (BPI). OBJECTIVE To describe a double-nerve transfer to the axillary nerve (AN), targeting both its anterior and posterior motor branches, through an axillary route. METHODS A total of 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric brachial plexuses were dissected. Using an axillary approach, the infraclavicular brachial plexus terminal branches were exposed, including the axillary, ulnar, and radial nerves. Under microscopic magnification, the triceps long head motor branch (TLHMB), anteromedial fascicles of the ulnar nerve (UF), the anterior motor branch of the axillary nerve (AAMB), and the teres minor motor branch (TMMB) were dissected and transected to simulate 2 nerve transfers, THLMB-AAMB and UF-TMMB. Several anatomical criteria were assessed, including the overlaps between fascicles when placed side-by-side. Six patients with C5/C6 BPI were then operated on using this technique. RESULTS TLHMB-AAMB and UF-TMMB transfers could be simulated in all specimens, with mean overlaps of 37.1 mm and 6.5 mm, respectively. After a mean follow-up of 23 mo, all patients had recovered grade-3 strength or more in the deltoid and teres minor muscles. Mean active shoulder flexion, abduction, and external rotation with the arm 90° abducted were of 128°, 117°, and 51°, respectively. No postoperative motor deficit was found in the UF territory. CONCLUSION A double-nerve transfer, based on radial and ulnar fascicles, appears to be an adequate option to reanimate both motor branches of the AN, providing satisfactory shoulder active elevations and external rotation in C5/C6 BPI patients.

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.

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.

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