Comparison of Surgical Strategies between Proximal Nerve Graft and/or Nerve Transfer and Distal Nerve Transfer Based on Functional Restoration of Elbow Flexion: A Retrospective Review of 147 Patients. |
|
Abstract | Surgical strategy to treat incomplete brachial plexus injury with palsies of the shoulder and elbow by using proximal nerve graft/transfer or distal nerve transfer is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare both strategies with respect to the recovery of elbow flexion. |
PMID | 29280873 |
Related Publications |
Shoulder abduction and external rotation restoration with nerve transfer. Comparison of single versus double nerve transfers for elbow flexion after brachial plexus injury. |
Authors | |
Mayor MeshTerms | |
Keywords | |
Journal Title | plastic and reconstructive surgery |
Publication Year Start | 2018-01-01 |
PMID- 29280873 OWN - NLM STAT- MEDLINE DCOM- 20180112 LR - 20180112 IS - 1529-4242 (Electronic) IS - 0032-1052 (Linking) VI - 141 IP - 1 DP - 2018 Jan TI - Comparison of Surgical Strategies between Proximal Nerve Graft and/or Nerve Transfer and Distal Nerve Transfer Based on Functional Restoration of Elbow Flexion: A Retrospective Review of 147 Patients. PG - 68e-79e LID - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003935 [doi] AB - BACKGROUND: Surgical strategy to treat incomplete brachial plexus injury with palsies of the shoulder and elbow by using proximal nerve graft/transfer or distal nerve transfer is still debated. The aim of this study was to compare both strategies with respect to the recovery of elbow flexion. METHODS: One hundred forty-seven patients were enrolled: 76 patients underwent reconstruction using proximal nerve graft/transfer, and 71 patients underwent reconstruction using distal nerve transfer. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively to assess the recovery rate and muscle strength of elbow flexion. Shoulder abduction and hand grip power were also recorded to assess any concomitant postoperative changes between the two methods. RESULTS: The best recovery rate for functional elbow flexion (p = 0.006) and the fastest recovery to M3 strength (p < 0.001) were found in the double fascicular transfer group. However, recovery of shoulder abduction with proximal nerve graft/transfer was significantly better than with distal nerve transfer (80.3 percent versus 66.2 percent in shoulder abduction >/=60 degrees; and 56.6 percent versus 38.0 percent in shoulder abduction >/=90 degrees). A significant decrease in grip strength between the operative and nonoperative hands was also found in patients undergoing distal nerve transfer (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Proximal nerve graft/transfer offers more accurate diagnosis and proper treatment to restore shoulder and elbow function simultaneously. Distal nerve transfer can offer more efficient elbow flexion. Combined, both strategies in primary nerve reconstruction are especially recommended when there is no healthy or not enough donor nerve available. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III. FAU - Hu, Ching-Hsuan AU - Hu CH AD - Taoyuan, Taiwan From the Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung Medical College and University. FAU - Chang, Tommy Nai-Jen AU - Chang TN FAU - Lu, Johnny Chuieng-Yi AU - Lu JC FAU - Laurence, Vincent G AU - Laurence VG FAU - Chuang, David Chwei-Chin AU - Chuang DC LA - eng PT - Comparative Study PT - Journal Article PT - Video-Audio Media PL - United States TA - Plast Reconstr Surg JT - Plastic and reconstructive surgery JID - 1306050 SB - AIM SB - IM MH - Adult MH - Brachial Plexus/*injuries/surgery MH - Elbow Joint/*physiology MH - Female MH - Follow-Up Studies MH - Hand Strength MH - Humans MH - Male MH - Middle Aged MH - *Nerve Transfer MH - Peripheral Nerve Injuries/*surgery MH - *Range of Motion, Articular MH - Recovery of Function MH - Retrospective Studies MH - Treatment Outcome EDAT- 2017/12/28 06:00 MHDA- 2018/01/13 06:00 CRDT- 2017/12/28 06:00 PHST- 2017/12/28 06:00 [entrez] PHST- 2017/12/28 06:00 [pubmed] PHST- 2018/01/13 06:00 [medline] AID - 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003935 [doi] AID - 00006534-201801000-00026 [pii] PST - ppublish SO - Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Jan;141(1):68e-79e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003935.