Axillary nerve repair by fascicle transfer from the ulnar or median nerve in upper brachial plexus palsy

Clinical assessment in brachial plexus injury surgery: systematic review and proposal for integrated evaluation among different medical departments

BACKGROUND

Brachial plexus injury (BPI) surgery involves diversity in surgical departments including plastic surgery, hand surgery, orthopedic surgery, and neurosurgery. There is a clear scarcity in terms of unified guidelines for outcome publications due to the absence of collaboration or consensus development between departments. This study aims to identify relevant clinical parameters and their standardized presentation to address this gap.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out to identify the clinical outcomes and methodological characteristics of the studies published regarding BPI surgery according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). Advanced search in PubMed was performed using the MeSH terms "Brachial Plexus Injury" (Major topic) AND "Surgery" (Subheading), obtaining a total of 2382 articles. Statistical analysis was performed, and the study was registered with the PROSPERO ID: CDR42022353785.

RESULTS

A total of 136 articles were included to the systematic review, and 11,949 patients were evaluated in different clinical outcomes according to the preferences of the authors. Traumatic events around the world are the most common cause of injury. The clinical components most reported were: British Medical Research Council in motor at 82.3%, visual analog scale in pain was 21.3%, sensitive components at 26.4%, and quality of life in 16.1% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of standardized clinical trials highlights the need to increase the level of evidence with the aim to identify clinical evaluations among all the diverse departments to provide optimal care for BPI treatment.

Transfer of Motor Fascicle From the Ulnar Nerve to the Axillary Nerve by Posterior Access. New Approach

ABSTRACT

We describe a new technique of transferring the motor branch ulnar nerve (UN) to the axillary nerve (AN) by posterior approach. Three patients with C5, C6, and C7 brachial plexus injury were operated. By supraclavicular approach, the spinal accessory was transferred to the suprascapular nerve. By posterior approach in the arm, the AN was identified within the quadrilateral space, and the UN was identified medially with intrafascicular dissection of a motor fascicle, which is lifted to 4 cm in length and transferred to AN. By medial approach, a motor branch from the median nerve is transferred to the biceps nerve. At a follow-up minimum of 10 months, the maximum abduction was 160 and the minimum 90 degrees. This technique, neurotization of the AN with fascicles of the UN, spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve, and median nerve branch to biceps nerve are indicated in C5-C7 avulsion when there is no radial nerve available.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Selective nerve transfers to restore shoulder abduction and flexion in acute flaccid myelitis: A case report

Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM) is a polio-like condition predominantly affecting children that is characterized by acute-onset, asymmetric flaccid paralysis, often preceded by a prodromal fever or viral illness. With prompt diagnosis and early surgical referral, nerve transfers may be performed to improve function. Highly selective nerve transfers are ideal to preserve existing functions while targeting specific deficits. In this report, we present a case of a double fascicular nerve transfer of median and ulnar nerve fascicles to the axillary nerve, combined with selective transfer of the spinal accessory nerve to the supraspinatus branch of the suprascapular nerve, performed for a 5-year-old girl who developed AFM after an upper respiratory infection. Six months after the onset of the patient's symptoms, the patient had continued weakness of shoulder flexion and abduction, atrophy of the deltoid, and supraspinatus muscles, though needle electromyography revealed a functioning infraspinatus muscle. The patient had no post-operative complications and at 2 years of postoperative follow up achieved shoulder abduction and flexion Active Movement Scale scores of 7/7 compared to preoperative scores of 2/7, with no loss of function in the donor nerve domains. The patient showed active shoulder abduction against gravity to 90° from 30° preoperatively and shoulder flexion to 180° from 15° preoperatively. This case report shows that highly selective nerve transfers may preserve existing functions while targeting specific deficits. A double fascicular transfer from the median and ulnar nerves to axillary nerve may provide abundant axons for functional recovery.

Possible donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstruction in dual neurotization for restoring shoulder abduction in brachial plexus injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Restoring shoulder abduction is one of the main priorities in the surgical treatment of brachial plexus injuries. Double nerve transfer to the axillary nerve and suprascapular nerve is widely used and considered the best option. The most common donor nerve for the suprascapular nerve is the spinal accessory nerve. However, donor nerves for axillary nerve reconstructions vary and it is still unclear which donor nerve has the best outcome. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review on reconstructions of suprascapular and axillary nerves and to perform a meta-analysis investigating the outcomes of different donor nerves on axillary nerve reconstructions. We conducted a systematic search of English literature from March 2001 to December 2020 following PRISMA guidelines. Two outcomes were assessed, abduction strength using the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale and range of motion (ROM). Twenty-two studies describing the use of donor nerves met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Donor nerves investigated included the radial nerve, intercostal nerves, medial pectoral nerve, ulnar nerve fascicle, median nerve fascicle and the lower subscapular nerve. Fifteen studies that investigated the radial and intercostal nerves met the inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. We found no statistically significant difference between either of these nerves in the abduction strength according to MRC score (radial nerve 3.66 ± 1.02 vs intercostal nerves 3.48 ± 0.64, p = 0.086). However, the difference in ROM was statistically significant (radial nerve 106.33 ± 39.01 vs. intercostal nerve 80.42 ± 24.9, p < 0.001). Our findings support using a branch of the radial nerve for the triceps muscle as a donor for axillary nerve reconstruction when possible. Intercostal nerves can be used in cases of total brachial plexus injury or involvement of the C7 root or posterior fascicle. Other promising methods need to be studied more thoroughly in order to validate and compare their results with the more commonly used methods.

Shoulder abduction reconstruction for C5-7 avulsion brachial plexus injury by dual nerve transfers: spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve and partial median or ulnar to axillary nerve

Results of shoulder abduction reconstruction in partial upper-type brachial plexus avulsion injuries are better when a triceps nerve is transferred to the axillary nerve in addition to the spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer. However, in C5-7 avulsion injuries, the triceps nerve may be unavailable as a donor nerve. We report the results of an alternative neurotization to the axillary nerve using either a partial median or ulnar nerve. Patients with C5, 6 ± 7 avulsion injuries and weak triceps who underwent dual nerve transfers for shoulder abduction reconstruction were recruited for the study. The second neurotization to the axillary nerve was from either a partial median or ulnar nerve that had an expandable muscle innervation of ≥ M4 motor power. Patients were assessed for recovery of shoulder abduction and external rotation. Nine patients (median age = 23 years) underwent these dual neurotizations from March 2005 to April 2013. The median time to surgery was 4.5 months. Recovery of shoulder abduction averaged 114.4° (range 90°-180°) and external rotation averaged 136.3° (range 135°-140°). Final shoulder abduction power was > M3 in all 9 patients and ≥ M4 in 6 patients. One patient with partial median nerve transfer had transient hypoaesthesia in his thumb and index finger and another had a residual M4 power in his thumb and index finger flexors. In C5-7 avulsion injuries, dual nerve transfers of the spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve and partial median or ulnar nerve to axillary nerve are good options for shoulder abduction reconstruction with minimal morbidity. Level of evidence is level IV.

Transfer of Motor Fascicle From the Median to the Axillary Nerve for Upper Brachial Plexus Injury: A Surgical Technique and Case Report

Upper brachial plexus injury or isolated lesions of the axillary nerve (AN) compromise shoulder functionality significantly. Different surgical techniques have been described for selective reconstruction of the AN, with good results especially in association with repair of the suprascapular nerve. The objective of this study is to describe the transfer of motor fascicles of the median nerve to the AN by an axillary approach in cadavers and the clinical results in 2 patients. Dissections were performed on 5 cadavers, followed by identification and dissection of the AN and its divisions before entering the quadrangular space. We standardized the surgical technique in which the median nerve was first identified and then an intrafascicular dissection was performed. Then we harvested a fascicle and transferred it to the anterolateral branch of the AN. Two patients underwent an operation; at 2 years of follow-up, average abduction of 125 degrees and external rotation of 95 degrees were observed. In conclusion, the transfer of motor fascicles of the median nerve to the AN by an axillary approach could be an alternative technique for the deltoid reinnervation in upper brachial plexus injury. Some advantages are the proximity of the donor nerve to the receptor nerve and the low morbidity of the target muscles of the donor nerve. Studies with a larger number of patients are required to establish its effectiveness compared with other techniques already described.

Lower subscapular nerve transfer for axillary nerve repair in upper brachial plexus palsy

BACKGROUND

The potential to utilize the lower subscapular nerve for brachial plexus surgery has been suggested in many anatomical studies. However, we know of no studies in the literature describing the use of the lower subscapular nerve for axillary nerve reconstruction to date. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of this nerve transfer in patients with upper brachial plexus palsy.

METHODS

Of 1340 nerve reconstructions in 568 patients with brachial plexus injury performed by the senior author (P.H.), a subset of 18 patients underwent axillary nerve reconstruction using the lower subscapular nerve and constitutes the patient group for this study. The median age was 48 years, and the median time between trauma and surgery was 6 months. A concomitant radial nerve injury was found in 8 patients.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients completed a minimum follow-up period of 24 months. Successful deltoid recovery was defined as (1) muscle strength MRC grade ≥ 3, (2) electromyographic signs of reinnervation, and (3) increase in deltoid muscle mass. Axillary nerve reconstruction was successful in 9 of 13 patients, which represents a success rate of 69.2%. No significant postoperative weakness of shoulder internal rotation or adduction was observed after transecting the lower subscapular nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

The lower subscapular nerve can be used as a safe and effective neurotization tool for upper brachial plexus injury, having a success rate of 69.2% for axillary nerve repair. Our technique presents a suitable alternative for patients with concomitant radial nerve injury.

Upper brachial plexus injury in adults: comparative effectiveness of different 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.

Reconstruction of a neurocutaneous defect of the proximal phalanx with a heterodigital arterialised nerve pedicle flap

BACKGROUND

Complex digital injuries involving soft-tissue loss and digital nerve defect pose a challenging problem for hand surgeons. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transferring the heterodigital arterialised nerve pedicle flap for reconstructing the digital neurocutaneous defects and to compare the results with those of transferring the cross-finger flap and secondary nerve grafting.

METHODS

From March 2008 to September 2011, the nerve pedicle flap was used in 12 patients who had a combination of soft-tissue and digital nerve defects. The injured fingers included four index, four long, three ring and one little finger. The mean size of the soft-tissue losses was 2.4×1.9 cm (range, 2.3×1.3 to 3.2×2.0 cm). The mean flap size was 2.6×2.1 cm (range, 2.5×1.5 to 3.4×2.2 cm). The length of the nerve defects ranged from 1.5 to 3.8 cm (mean, 2.8 cm). The nerve defect was reconstructed with transfer of the digital nerve dorsal branch. For comparison, we collected a series of 24 patients with similar defects treated with the cross-finger flap and secondary free nerve grafting.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found between the two groups in static two-point discrimination (p<.01) and pain (p=.03) in the reconstructed finger. In comparison, the study group presented better discriminatory sensation on the finger pulp and lower incidence of pain sensibility in the injured finger. There was no significant difference in cold intolerance and Semmes-Weinstein monofilament. In the study group, the total active motion of the donor fingers was similar to that of the opposite hands.

CONCLUSIONS

The heterodigital arterialised nerve pedicle flap is useful and reliable for reconstructing the neurocutaneous defects in the proximal phalanx. Comparable sensory recovery and lower pain incidence can be achieved using our nerve pedicle flap instead of conventional nerve grafting.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

End-to-side neurorrhaphy in brachial plexus reconstruction

Object

Although a number of theoretical and experimental studies dealing with end-to-side neurorrhaphy (ETSN) have been published to date, there is still a considerable lack of clinical trials investigating this technique. Here, the authors describe their experience with ETSN in axillary and musculocutaneous nerve reconstruction in patients with brachial plexus palsy.

Methods

From 1999 to 2007, out of 791 reconstructed nerves in 441 patients treated for brachial plexus injury, the authors performed 21 axillary and 2 musculocutaneous nerve sutures onto the median, ulnar, or radial nerves. This technique was only performed in patients whose donor nerves, such as the thoracodorsal and medial pectoral nerves, which the authors generally use for repair of axillary and musculocutaneous nerves, respectively, were not available. In all patients, a perineurial suture was carried out after the creation of a perineurial window.

Results

The overall success rate of the ETSN was 43.5%. Reinnervation of the deltoid muscle with axillary nerve suture was successful in 47.6% of the patients, but reinnervation of the biceps muscle was unsuccessful in the 2 patients undergoing musculocutaneous nerve repair.

Conclusions

The authors conclude that ETSN should be performed in axillary nerve reconstruction but only when commonly used donor nerves are not available.