Search

Objective: This pooled analysis evaluates the association between the number of nerves transferred and postoperative outcomes after intercostal nerve (ICN) nerve transfer for elbow flexion., Methods: A systematic and pooled analysis of studies reporting individual patient demographics and outcomes after ICN-musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) transfer for traumatic brachial plexus injury was conducted. The primary outcome was the ability to attain an elbow flexion Medical Research Council (MRC) score of ≥4 at the final postoperative follow-up visit., Results: Ten studies were included for a total of 128 patients. There were 43 patients who underwent two ICNT, 77 patients who underwent three ICNT, and 8 patients who underwent four ICNT. The three groups did not differ in ability to achieve MRC ≥ 4 (2ICNT 48.8%, 3ICNT 42.9%, 4ICNT 50.0%, p  = 0.789). The number of ICNs transferred was not associated with MRC scores ≥4 on the multivariable analysis (OR: 0.55, p  = 0.126)., Conclusions: These results indicate that two ICN transfers may be as effective as three ICN and four ICN transfers and highlight the potential for nonsurgical factors to influence postoperative outcomes. Taken together, this pooled analysis leads us to question the utility of transferring >2 ICNs for MCN neurotization.

Major peripheral nerve injuries are devastating and represent a very challenging clinical problem. Despite many years of advancement in peripheral nerve research, results so far have been fair at best, with only 50% of patients regaining useful function. Advancement of techniques in imaging, better understanding of the physiology of nerve recovery, improved repair and grafting options, and secondary reconstructive techniques, including tendon and nerve transfers, have helped facilitate a degree of more effective treatment. This article presents current concepts regarding the principles of management, expected outcomes, and new advancements in major upper extremity peripheral nerve injuries.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between extent of brachial plexus injury and shoulder abduction/external rotation outcomes after spinal accessory nerve (SAN) to suprascapular nerve (SSN) transfer. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting outcomes on patients undergoing SAN to SSN nerve transfer. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: age under 18, nerve transfer for reanimation of the shoulder other than SAN to SSN, and less than 12 months of follow-up postoperatively. Pooled analysis was performed, and primary outcomes were Medical Research Council (MRC) score and range of motion (ROM) for shoulder abduction and external rotation. Univariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association between extent of brachial plexus injury and shoulder abduction/external rotation outcomes after SAN to SSN transfer. A multivariate logistic regression analysis model including age, injury to surgery interval, and extent of injury as factors was also created. Results: Univariate logistic regression analysis showed greater extent of injury to be a predictor of poorer shoulder abduction outcomes (OR: 0.502; 95% CI: 0.260-0.971, p  = 0.040). Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed this association (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.236-0.877, p  = 0.019). Extent of injury was not significantly associated with external rotation outcomes on univariate analysis (OR: 0.435; 95% CI: 0.095-1.995, p  = 0.284) or multivariate analysis (OR: 0.445; 95% CI: 0.097-2.046, p  = 0.298). Age and injury to surgery interval were not significantly associated with postoperative outcomes. Conclusions: More extensive brachial plexus injuries are associated with inferior outcomes after SAN to SSN transfer. A potential explanation for this finding includes lost contribution of muscles from the shoulder girdle that receive innervation from outside of the upper brachial plexus. The relationship between extent of injury and postoperative outcomes is important to recognize when determining and discussing operative intervention with patients.

Objectives: Double fascicular transfer is argued to result in improved elbow flexion compared to the traditional ulnar fascicular transfer because it reinnervates both the biceps and the brachialis. This study seeks to determine if double fascicular transfer should be preferred over ulnar fascicular transfer to restore elbow flexion in patients with upper trunk brachial plexus injuries (BPI) by analyzing the current database of literature on the topic., Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting Medical Research Council (MRC) scores on individual patients undergoing ulnar fascicular transfer and double fascicular transfer (ulnar and median nerve fascicle donors). Patients were excluded if: age < 18 years old and follow-up <12 months. Demographics obtained include age, sex, extent of injury (C5-C6/C5-C7), preoperative interval, procedure type, and follow-up time. Outcomes included absolute MRC score and ability to achieve MRC score ≥3 and ≥4. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were completed to evaluate predictors of postoperative outcomes., Results: Eighteen studies (176 patients) were included for pooled analysis. Patients that underwent double fascicular transfer had a higher percentage of patients attain a MRC score ≥ 4 compared to ulnar fascicular transfer subjects (83.0% vs. 63.3%, p = .013). Double fascicular transfer was a predictor of achieving high MRC scores (OR = 2.829, p = .015). Multivariate analysis showed that procedure type was the only near significant predictor of ability to obtain MRC ≥4 (OR: 2.338, p = .054)., Conclusions: This analysis demonstrates that double fascicular transfer is associated with superior postoperative outcomes and should be performed for restoring elbow flexion., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)