A cut throat: a case of C5-C8 brachial plexus root transection providing evidence of T1 innervation of thumb and finger extensors

The T1 nerve root is not routinely thought of as innervating the extensors of the thumb and fingers. Work by Bertelli and Ghizoni proposed that the pattern of brachial plexus paralysis with intact hand function and thumb and finger extensors traditionally attributed to C5/6/7 root injury is in fact a C5/6/7/8 injury, with only T1 remaining intact - a 'T1 hand'. This case presents a 19-year-old male who was stabbed in the neck; exploratory surgery determined complete transection of the brachial plexus, with only the T1 nerve root remaining intact. Clinical examination demonstrated grade M4 pronation (with pronator quadratus), wrist extension (with extensor carpi ulnaris), thumb and finger extension (with extensor policis longus and brevis, extensor digitorum communis and extensor index proprius), wrist flexion (with palmaris longus), finger flexion (with flexor digitorum superficialis and profundus), thumb flexion (with flexor policis longus), and thenar and hypothenar muscles. Extensor carpi radialis longus and brevis, flexor carpi radialis and flexor carpi ulnaris were paralyzed. Triceps scored M2. This case provides unequivocal evidence that the T1 root provides significant innervation to the extrinsic thumb and finger extensors.

The Effectiveness of Different Nerve Transfers in the Restoration of Elbow Flexion in Adults Following Brachial Plexus Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Restoration of elbow flexion is an important goal in the treatment of patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury. Numerous studies have described various nerve transfers for neurotization of the musculocutaneous nerve (or its motor branches); however, there is uncertainty over the effectiveness of each method. The aim of this study was to summarize the published evidence in adults with traumatic brachial plexus injury.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, medRxiv, and bioRxiv were systematically searched from inception to April 12, 2021. We included studies that reported the outcomes of nerve transfers for the restoration of elbow flexion in adults. The primary outcome was elbow flexion of grade 4 (M4) or higher on the British Medical Research Council scale. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses, and heterogeneity was explored using metaregression. Confidence intervals (CIs) were generated to the 95% level.

RESULTS

We included 64 articles, which described 13 different nerve transfers. There were 1,335 adults, of whom 813 (61%) had partial and 522 (39%) had pan-plexus injuries. Overall, 75% of the patients with partial brachial plexus injuries achieved ≥M4 (CI, 69%-80%), and the choice of donor nerve was associated with clinically meaningful differences in the outcome. Of the patients with pan-plexus injuries, 45% achieved ≥M4 (CI, 31%-60%), and overall, each month delay from the time of injury to reconstruction reduced the probability of achieving ≥M4 by 7% (CI, 1%-12%).

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of donor nerve affects the chance of attaining a British Medical Research Council score of ≥4 in upper-trunk reconstruction. For patients with pan-plexus injuries, delay in neurotization may be detrimental to motor outcomes.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Reconstruction of C5-C8 (T1 Hand) Brachial Plexus Paralysis in a Series of 52 Patients

PURPOSE

A C5-C8 brachial plexus root injury, also known as a T1 hand, is associated with paralysis of shoulder abduction or external rotation and elbow flexion, accompanied by variable elbow, wrist, thumb, or finger extension deficits. We report the results of reconstruction for C5-C8 brachial plexus paralysis in 52 patients operated upon within 12 months of injury and having at least 24 months of follow-up.

METHODS

We considered surgery to be indicated if, by the fifth month after trauma, shoulder abduction and external rotation and elbow flexion remained paralyzed. Root grafting was possible in 35% of the patients and was performed concomitantly with nerve transfers. Shoulder motion was reconstructed by transferring the spinal accessory to the suprascapular nerve. Elbow flexion was restored by transferring fascicles from either the median or ulnar nerve to the biceps motor branch. When needed, elbow extension was reconstructed by transferring 1 motor branch of the flexor carpi ulnaris to the triceps lower medial head motor branch. Wrist extension was restored by transferring the distal anterior interosseous nerve to the extensor carpi radialis brevis motor branch.

RESULTS

Within 12 months of injury, we observed preserved or spontaneous recovery of elbow, wrist, finger, and thumb extension in 25%, 12%, 50%, and 68% of patients, respectively. After surgical reconstruction, improved range of motion for shoulder, elbow flexion, and wrist extension scoring at least M3 was present in 90% of our patients. All 10 patients in whom a motor branch of the flexor carpi ulnaris was used for triceps reconstruction recovered elbow extension, while flexor carpi ulnaris function was preserved.

CONCLUSIONS

In approximatively 90% of our patients, distal nerve transfers resulted in functional recovery of shoulder abduction, elbow flexion or extension, and wrist extension.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Long-term evaluation of hand function in children undergoing Oberlin and Oberlin-like procedures for reinnervation of the biceps muscle

PURPOSE

Long-term evaluation of hand function in children who underwent transfer procedures to reinnervate the biceps muscle, using fascicles from the ulnar and median nerves as donors.

METHODS

In the last follow-up evaluation, the children underwent a neurological examination, and their hand status was classified according to the Raimondi grading system for hand function. Two physical measurements, the child health assessment questionnaire (CHAQ) and the Sollerman hand function test, were applied to assess upper extremity function.

RESULTS

Eight children were re-evaluated. In four the donor fascicle was from the ulnar nerve and in four from the median nerve. The average interval between surgery and the last evaluation was 8.3 years (range 6-10 years). Five patients scored 5 points in the Raimondi grading system, and 3 patients scored 4 points. The results from the CHAQ ranged from 0.03 to 0.41. The results from the Sollerman test were between 60 and 77 for the affected upper limb and between 65 and 79 for the dominant upper limb.

CONCLUSION

Nerve transfer of a fascicle from the ulnar or median nerve to the biceps motor branch in children with neonatal brachial plexus palsy does not result in hand dysfunction.

Safe level for harvesting for ulnar and median nerve transfers: a microanatomical and histological study

In selective ulnar and median nerve transfers, donor nerve fascicles should be harvested in an area where motor and sensory fascicles are intermingled to minimize motor or sensory deficits. We aimed to define such an area for ulnar and median nerve harvesting through microanatomical dissection and histology in 12 fresh adult cadaveric upper extremities. Anatomically, we studied the arrangement, localization, and histological features of fascicle groups in two nerves at eight segments of the upper arms. Histological sections were examined to confirm the findings of the anatomical dissections. We found that sensory and motor fascicles were mixed proximally to the third most distal segment of the ulnar nerve and to the fourth most distal segment of the median nerve. We conclude that harvesting a part of the ulnar or median nerve proximal to these levels minimizes donor nerve deficits.

Combined flexor carpi ulnaris and flexor carpi radialis transfer for restoring elbow function after brachial plexus injury

The result of combined agonist and antagonist muscle innervation in traumatic brachial plexus injury through the intraplexal fascicle nerve transfers with the same donor function has not yet been reported. We describe a patient with a C5-C7 traumatic brachial plexus injury who had a combined transfer of the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) fascicle to the musculocutaneous nerve and the flexor carpi ulnaris (FCU) fascicle to the radial nerve of the triceps. The patient returned for his follow-up visit 2 years after his surgery. The muscle strengths of his triceps and biceps were Medical Research Council grade 2 and 0, respectively. Compared with his uninjured side, his grip strength was 9.8%, and his pinch strength was 14.2%. Our case report provides insights on result of combined agonist and antagonist muscle innervation through combining the motor fascicle of the FCR and FCU to restore the elbow flexor and extensor. The result may not be promising.

Development of a mouse nerve-transfer model for brachial plexus injury

Nerve transfer involves the use of a portion of a healthy nerve to repair an injured nerve, and the process has been used to alleviate traumatic brachial plexus injuries in humans. Study of the neural mechanisms that occur during nerve transfer, however, requires the establishment of reliable experimental models. In this study, we developed an ulnar-musculocutaneous nerve-transfer model wherein the biceps muscle of a mouse was re-innervated using a donor ulnar nerve. Similar muscle action potentials were detected in both the end-to-end suture of the transected nerve (correctrepair) group and the ulnar-musculocutaneous nerve-transfer group. Also, re-innervated acetylcholine receptor (AChR) clusters and muscle spindles were observed in both procedures. There were fewer re-innervated AChR clusters in the nerve transfer group than in the correct repair group at 4 weeks, but the numbers were equal at 24 weeks following surgery. Thus, our ulnar-musculocutaneous nerve-transfer model allowed physiological and morphological evaluation for re-innervation process in mice and revealed the delay of this process during nerve transfer procedure. This model will provide great opportunities to study regeneration, re-innervation, and functional recovery induced via nerve transfer procedures.

Nerve transfer from the median to musculocutaneous nerve to induce active elbow flexion in selected cases of arthrogryposis multiplex congenita

BACKGROUND

Arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC) is a rare disease which affects mainly upper and lower extremities. Affected patients are not able to eat unassisted due to elbow contracture and nonexistent active elbow flexion. In traumatic brachial plexus palsies, a nerve transfer from either median or ulnar nerve to the musculocutaneous nerve has proved to induce active elbow flexion, and we report our results of such a procedure in a nontraumatic condition, that is, arthrogryposis.

METHODS

We selected four patients with AMC type 1 (6 extremities, 2 males, 2 females) diagnosed with AMC presenting to our institution shortly after birth from 2014 to 2016 to perform a nerve transfer from the median nerve to the musculocutaneous nerve in order to induce active elbow flexion. The indication of application of this surgical procedure was based on active finger and wrist flexion, limited contracture of elbow joints and evidence of flexing muscle fibers detected by sonography.

RESULTS

Five nerve transfers were conducted with a follow up of 2-5 years. Two extremities reached active elbow flexion motorgrade M4, two M3, and one M1 at latest follow up. One patient developed a postoperative suture granuloma. One nerve transfer was abandoned due to neuroanatomic variation. One extremity was treated with botulinum toxin in triceps muscle in addition to the nerve transfer.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of selected cases of AMC Type 1 we were able to induce active elbow flexion using a nerve transfer technique developed for traumatic and obstetric brachial plexus palsies. In four extremities the procedure achieved independent hand-to-mouth active elbow flexion. Level of evidence four.

Surgery for nerve injury: current and future perspectives

In this review article, the authors offer their perspective on nerve surgery for nerve injury, with a focus on recent evolution of management and the current surgical management. The authors provide a brief historical perspective to lay the foundations of the modern understanding of clinical nerve injury and its evolving management, especially over the last century. The shift from evaluation of the nerve injury using macroscopic techniques of exploration and external neurolysis to microscopic interrogation, interfascicular dissection, and internal neurolysis along with the use of intraoperative electrophysiology were important advances of the past 50 years. By the late 20th century, the advent and popularization of interfascicular nerve grafting techniques heralded a major advance in nerve reconstruction and allowed good outcomes to be achieved in a large percentage of nerve injury repair cases. In the past 2 decades, there has been a paradigm shift in surgical nerve repair, wherein surgeons are not only directing the repair at the injury zone, but also are deliberately performing distal-targeted nerve transfers as a preferred alternative in an attempt to restore function. The peripheral rewiring approach allows the surgeon to convert a very proximal injury with long regeneration distances and (often) uncertain outcomes to a distal injury and repair with a greater potential of regenerative success and functional recovery. Nerve transfers, originally performed as a salvage procedure for severe brachial plexus avulsion injuries, are now routinely done for various less severe brachial plexus injuries and many other proximal nerve injuries, with reliably good to even excellent results. The outcomes from nerve transfers for select clinical nerve injury are emphasized in this review. Extension of the rewiring paradigm with nerve transfers for CNS lesions such as spinal cord injury and stroke are showing great potential and promise. Cortical reeducation is required for success, and an emerging field of rehabilitation and restorative neurosciences is evident, which couples a nerve transfer procedure to robotically controlled limbs and mind-machine interfacing. The future for peripheral nerve repair has never been more exciting.

Elbow flexion reconstruction with nerve transfer or grafting in patients with brachial plexus injuries: A systematic review and comparison study

INTRODUCTION

Posttraumatic brachial plexus (BP) palsy was used to be treated by reconstruction with nerve grafts. For the last two decades, nerve transfers have gained popularity and believed to be more effective than nerve grafting. The aim of this systematic review was to compare elbow flexion restoration with nerve transfers or nerve grafting after traumatic BP injury.

METHODS

PRISMA-IPD structure was used for 52 studies included. Patients were allocated as C5-C6 (n = 285), C5-C6-C7 (n = 150), and total BP injury (n = 245) groups. In each group, two treatment modalities were compared, and effects of age and preoperative interval were analyzed.

RESULTS

In C5-C6 injuries, 93.1% of nerve transfer patients achieved elbow flexion force ≥M3, which was significantly better when compared to 69.2% of nerve graft patients (p < 0.001). For improved outcomes of nerve transfer patients, shorter preoperative interval was a significant factor in all injury patterns (p < 0.001 for C5-C6 injuries and total BP injuries, p = 0.018 for C5-C6-C7 injuries), and young age was a significant factor in total BP injury pattern (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses showed that nerve transfers appear superior to nerve graftings especially in patients with a C5-C6 injury. Unnecessary delays in surgery must be prevented, and younger patients may have more chance for better recovery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Recovery of Elbow Flexion after Nerve Reconstruction versus Free Functional Muscle Transfer for Late, Traumatic Brachial Plexus Palsy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

In late presentation of brachial plexus trauma, it is unclear whether donor nerves should be devoted to nerve reconstruction or reserved for free functional muscle transfer. The authors systematically reviewed recovery of elbow flexion after nerve reconstruction versus free functional muscle transfer for late, traumatic brachial plexus palsy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases to identify all cases of traumatic brachial plexus palsy in patients aged 18 years or older. Patients who underwent late (≥12 months) nerve reconstruction or free functional muscle transfer for elbow flexion were included. Age, time to operation, and level of brachial plexus injury were recorded. British Medical Research Council grade for strength and range of motion were evaluated for elbow flexion.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies met criteria, for a total of 103 patients (nerve reconstruction, n = 53; free functional muscle transfer, n = 50). There were no differences across groups regarding surgical age (time from injury) and preoperative elbow flexion. For upper trunk injuries, 53 percent of reconstruction patients versus 100 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M3 or greater strength, and 43 percent of reconstruction patients versus 70 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M4 or greater strength. Of the total brachial plexus injuries, 37 percent of reconstruction patients versus 78 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grade M3 or greater strength, and 16 percent of reconstruction patients versus 46 percent of muscle transfer patients achieved grades M4 or greater strength.

CONCLUSION

In late presentation of traumatic brachial plexus injuries, donor nerves should be reserved for free functional muscle transfer to restore elbow flexion.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Nerve transfer versus muscle transfer to restore elbow flexion after pan-brachial plexus injury: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE Pan-brachial plexus injury (PBPI), involving C5-T1, disproportionately affects young males, causing lifelong disability and decreased quality of life. The restoration of elbow flexion remains a surgical priority for these patients. Within the first 6 months of injury, transfer of spinal accessory nerve (SAN) fascicles via a sural nerve graft or intercostal nerve (ICN) fascicles to the musculocutaneous nerve can restore elbow flexion. Beyond 1 year, free-functioning muscle transplantation (FFMT) of the gracilis muscle can be used to restore elbow flexion. The authors present the first cost-effectiveness model to directly compare the different treatment strategies available to a patient with PBPI. This model assesses the quality of life impact, surgical costs, and possible income recovered through restoration of elbow flexion. METHODS A Markov model was constructed to simulate a 25-year-old man with PBPI without signs of recovery 4.5 months after injury. The management options available to the patient were SAN transfer, ICN transfer, delayed FFMT, or no treatment. Probabilities of surgical success rates, quality of life measurements, and disability were derived from the published literature. Cost-effectiveness was defined using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) defined by the ratio between costs of a treatment strategy and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A strategy was considered cost-effective if it yielded an ICER less than a willingness-to-pay of $50,000/QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed to address parameter uncertainty. RESULTS The base case model demonstrated a lifetime QALYs of 22.45 in the SAN group, 22.0 in the ICN group, 22.3 in the FFMT group, and 21.3 in the no-treatment group. The lifetime costs of income lost through disability and interventional/rehabilitation costs were $683,400 in the SAN group, $727,400 in the ICN group, $704,900 in the FFMT group, and $783,700 in the no-treatment group. Each of the interventional modalities was able to dramatically improve quality of life and decrease lifelong costs. A Monte Carlo PSA demonstrated that at a willingness-to-pay of $50,000/QALY gained, SAN transfer dominated in 88.5% of iterations, FFMT dominated in 7.5% of iterations, ICN dominated in 3.5% of iterations, and no treatment dominated in 0.5% of iterations. CONCLUSIONS This model demonstrates that nerve transfer surgery and muscle transplantation are cost-effective strategies in the management of PBPI. These reconstructive neurosurgical modalities can improve quality of life and lifelong earnings through decreasing disability.

Analyzing cost-effectiveness of ulnar and median nerve transfers to regain forearm flexion

OBJECTIVE Peripheral nerve transfers to regain elbow flexion via the ulnar nerve (Oberlin nerve transfer) and median nerves are surgical options that benefit patients. Prior studies have assessed the comparative effectiveness of ulnar and median nerve transfers for upper trunk brachial plexus injury, yet no study has examined the cost-effectiveness of this surgery to improve quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The authors present a cost-effectiveness model of the Oberlin nerve transfer and median nerve transfer to restore elbow flexion in the adult population with upper brachial plexus injury. METHODS Using a Markov model, the authors simulated ulnar and median nerve transfers and conservative measures in terms of neurological recovery and improvements in quality of life (QOL) for patients with upper brachial plexus injury. Transition probabilities were collected from previous studies that assessed the surgical efficacy of ulnar and median nerve transfers, complication rates associated with comparable surgical interventions, and the natural history of conservative measures. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), defined as cost in dollars per QALY, were calculated. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios less than $50,000/QALY were considered cost-effective. One-way and 2-way sensitivity analyses were used to assess parameter uncertainty. Probabilistic sampling was used to assess ranges of outcomes across 100,000 trials. RESULTS The authors' base-case model demonstrated that ulnar and median nerve transfers, with an estimated cost of $5066.19, improved effectiveness by 0.79 QALY over a lifetime compared with conservative management. Without modeling the indirect cost due to loss of income over lifetime associated with elbow function loss, surgical treatment had an ICER of $6453.41/QALY gained. Factoring in the loss of income as indirect cost, surgical treatment had an ICER of -$96,755.42/QALY gained, demonstrating an overall lifetime cost savings due to increased probability of returning to work. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to assumptions about cost of surgery, probability of good surgical outcome, and spontaneous recovery of neurological function with conservative treatment. Two-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that surgical intervention was cost-effective with an ICER of $18,828.06/QALY even with the authors' most conservative parameters with surgical costs at $50,000 and probability of success of 50% when considering the potential income recovered through returning to work. Probabilistic sampling demonstrated that surgical intervention was cost-effective in 76% of cases at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS The authors' model demonstrates that ulnar and median nerve transfers for upper brachial plexus injury improves QALY in a cost-effective manner.

Can an injured nerve be used as a donor nerve for distal nerve transfer?-An experimental study in rats

BACKGROUND

Distal nerve transfer has proven efficacy. The purpose of this study was to investigate if an injured nerve can be used as a donor nerve for transfer, and to determine the threshold of injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Rat's left ulnar-nerves in the axilla with different degrees of injury were selected as the donor nerves for transfer, and the musculocutaneous-nerves the target nerves for being re-innervated. Six rats each served as positive and negative controls: Group A, intact ulnar-nerve transfer; and Group E, the ulnar-nerve was cut but no transfer. Ten rats each were assigned to Group B to Group D with 25%, 50%, and 75% transected ulnar-nerve, respectively and all were transferred to the musculocutaneous-nerve. After a 12-week recovery period, outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Biceps muscle weight measurements showed all experimental groups-D 0.28 ± 0.02 g/72%, C 0.28 ± 0.03 g/73%, B 0.29 ± 0.04 g/74%, and A 0.29 ± 0.04 g/80%-were lighter than group H 0.36 ± 0.04 g, which were all statistically significant (P < 0.001). Muscle tetanus contraction force measurements were the lowest in group D35 ± 8.6 g/69%. Groups C and B measured 41 ± 8.5 g/75% and 40 ± 2.2 g/77% and group A 41 ± 9.4 g/95%, respectively. Group H showed muscle contraction force of 52 ± 7.2 g, which was statistically significant when compared to experimental groups (P < 0.05-0.001). EMG measurements of the biceps muscles showed: group D was 3.6 ± 0.7 mV/69%, group C was 3.6 ± 0.6 mV/75%, and group B was 4.2 mV ± 0.7/81%. Group H was5.1 ± 0.7 mV and statistically significant different when compared with experimental groups (P < 0.05-0.001).Axon counts of healthy ulnar-nerve (Group H) were 1849 ± 362. Axon counts of the injured ulnar-nerve were in group B 1447 ± 579/78%, group C 1051 ± 367/57% and group D 567 ± 230/31%.

CONCLUSION

The donor nerve should be healthy in order to provide optimal result. A big nerve (e.g., ulnar nerve) but injured with at least 75% axon spared is still potentially effective for transfer. In contrast, a small nerve (e.g., intercostal nerve) once injured with 75%axon spared would be considered a suboptimal donor nerve.

Effect of Collateral Sprouting on Donor Nerve Function After Nerve Coaptation: A Study of the Brachial Plexus

Background

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the donor nerve from the C7 spinal nerve of the rabbit brachial plexus after a coaptation procedure. Assessment was performed of avulsion of the C5 and C6 spinal nerves treated by coaptation of these nerves to the C7 spinal nerve.

Material/Methods

After nerve injury, fourteen rabbits were treated by end-to-side coaptation (ETS), and fourteen animals were treated by side-to-side coaptation (STS) on the right brachial plexus. Electrophysiological and histomorphometric analyses and the skin pinch test were used to evaluate the outcomes.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in the G-ratio proximal and distal to the coaptation in the ETS group, but the differences in the axon, myelin sheath and fiber diameters were statistically significant. The comparison of the ETS and STS groups distal to the coaptation with the controls demonstrated statistically significant differences in the fiber, axon, and myelin sheath diameters. With respect to the G-ratio, the ETS group exhibited no significant differences relative to the control, whereas the G-ratio in the STS group and the controls differed significantly. In the electrophysiological study, the ETS and STS groups exhibited major changes in the biceps and subscapularis muscles.

Conclusions

The coaptation procedure affects the histological structure of the nerve donor, but it does not translate into changes in nerve conduction or the sensory function of the limb. The donor nerve lesion in the ETS group is transient and has minimal clinical relevance.

Thoracodorsal nerve transfer for triceps reinnervation in partial brachial plexus injuries

PURPOSE

To report the clinical outcomes of thoracodorsal nerve (TDN) transfers to the triceps motor branches for elbow extension restoration in patients with partial brachial plexus injuries (BPI).

METHODS

Eight male patients of mean age 23 years and suffering from a partial BPI underwent direct coaptation of the TDN to the nerve of the upper medial and long heads of the triceps, an average 6 months after their accident.

RESULTS

Seven patients achieved M4 elbow extension strength and one patient M3, according to the BMRC scale, after a mean follow-up of 21 months.

DISCUSSION

Direct TDN transfer might be a valid surgical procedure for the restoration of elbow extension in patients with partial BPI.

The median nerve consistently drives flexion of the distal phalanx of the ring and little fingers: Interest in finger flexion reconstruction by nerve transfers

Surgeons believe that in high ulnar nerve lesion distal interphalangeal joint (DIP) flexion of the ring and little finger is abolished. In this article, we present the results of a study on innervation of the flexor digitorum profundus of the ring and little fingers in five patients with high ulnar nerve injury and in 19 patients with a brachial plexus, posterior cord, or radial nerve injury. Patients with ulnar nerve lesion were assessed clinically and during surgery for ulnar nerve repair we confirmed complete lesion of the ulnar nerve in all cases. In the remaining 19 patients, during surgery, either the median nerve (MN) or the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) was stimulated electrically and DIP flexion of the ring and little fingers evaluated. All patients with high ulnar nerve lesions had active DIP flexion of the ring and little fingers. Strength scored M4 in the ring and M3-M4 in the little finger. Electrical stimulation of either the MN or AIN produced DIP flexion of the ring and little fingers. Contrary to common knowledge, we identified preserved flexion of the distal phalanx of the ring and little fingers in high ulnar nerve lesions. On the basis of these observations, nerve transfers to the AIN may provide flexion of all fingers.

Comparison of objective muscle strength in C5-C6 and C5-C7 brachial plexus injury patients after double nerve transfer

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quantitative muscle strength to distinguish the outcomes of different injury levels in upper arm type brachial plexus injury (BPI) patients with double nerve transfer.

METHODS

Nine patients with C5-C6 lesions (age = 32.2 ± 13.9 year old) and nine patients with C5-C7 lesions (age = 32.4 ± 7.9 year old) received neurotization of the spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve combined with the Oberlin procedure (fascicles of ulnar nerve transfer to the musculocutaneous nerve) were recruited. The average time interval between operation and evaluation were 27.3 ± 21.0 and 26.9 ± 20.6 months for C5-C6 and C5-C7, respectively. British Medical Research Council (BMRC) scores and the objective strength measured by a handheld dynamometer were evaluated in multiple muscles to compare outcomes between C5-C6 and C5-C7 injuries.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in BMRC scores between the groups. C5-C6 BPI patients had greater quantitative strength in shoulder flexor (P = 0.02), shoulder extensor (P < 0.01), elbow flexor (P = 0.04), elbow extensor (P = 0.04), wrist extensor (P = 0.04), and hand grip (P = 0.04) than C5-C7 BPI patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Upper arm type BPI patients have a good motor recovery after double nerve transfer. The different outcomes between C5-C6 and C5-C7 BPI patients appeared in muscles responding to hand grip, wrist extension, and sagittal movements in shoulder and elbow joints.