Michelle F. Kircher

Hemi-contralateral C7 transfer in traumatic brachial plexus injuries: outcomes and complications.

BACKGROUND In brachial plexus injuries with nerve root avulsions, the options for nerve reconstruction are limited. In select situations, half or all of the contralateral C7 (CC7) nerve root can be transferred to the injured side for brachial plexus reconstruction. Although encouraging results have been reported, CC7 transfer has not gained universal popularity. The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate hemi-CC7 transfer for restoration of shoulder function or median nerve function in patients with severe brachial plexus injury. METHODS A retrospective review of all patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury who had undergone hemi-CC7 transfer at a single institution during an eight-year period was performed. Complications were evaluated in all patients regardless of the duration of follow-up. The results of electrodiagnostic studies and modified British Medical Research Council (BMRC) motor grading were reviewed in all patients with more than twenty-seven months of follow-up. RESULTS Fifty-five patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury underwent hemi-CC7 transfer performed between 2001 and 2008 for restoration of shoulder function or median nerve function. Thirteen patients who underwent hemi-CC7 transfer to the shoulder and fifteen patients who underwent hemi-CC7 transfer to the median nerve had more than twenty-seven months of follow-up. Twelve of the thirteen patients in the shoulder group demonstrated electromyographic evidence of reinnervation, but only three patients achieved M3 or greater shoulder abduction motor function. Three of the fifteen patients in the median nerve group demonstrated electromyographic evidence of reinnervation, but none developed M3 or greater composite grip. All patients experienced donor-side sensory or motor changes; these were typically mild and transient, but one patient sustained severe, permanent donor-side motor and sensory losses. CONCLUSIONS The outcomes of hemi-CC7 transfer for restoration of shoulder motor function or median nerve function following posttraumatic brachial plexus injury do not justify the risk of donor-site morbidity, which includes possible permanent motor and sensory losses.

Comparison of single versus double nerve transfers for elbow flexion after brachial plexus injury

Background: Restoration of elbow flexion is commonly achieved with nerve transfer to the musculocutaneous nerve branches after upper trunk brachial plexus injury. It is unknown if double nerve transfer to the biceps and brachialis nerve branches results in greater strength than single nerve transfer to the biceps branch alone. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of all patients receiving nerve transfer to restore elbow flexion. Single and double nerve transfers were compared in regard to severity of injury, elbow flexion, supination, grip strengths, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores. Elbow flexion and supination torque strength were measured quantitatively. Results: Fifty-five patients underwent nerve transfer to restore elbow flexion (23 single, 32 double). At similar follow-up periods, British Medical Research Council grade improved to 4 or better in 14 of 21 single and 24 of 30 double nerve transfer patients. Supination strength was similar between groups (p = 0.148). Grip strength was greater in the double nerve transfer patients (p = 0.028). Preoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were significantly greater in single versus double nerve transfer patients (p = 0.018). Although single nerve transfer patients had a greater improvement in scores, the final mean scores were similar in the two groups. The severity of injury was different between the two groups, with 19 of 23 single nerve transfer patients having injury beyond the C5–6 level and only 16 of 32 of double nerve transfer patients with greater than C5–6 injury (p = 0.020). Conclusions: Outcomes are similar between the two groups for elbow flexion and supination strength. Postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores are similar in single and double nerve transfer patients.

Factors Affecting Outcome of Triceps Motor Branch Transfer for Isolated Axillary Nerve Injury

PURPOSE Triceps motor branch transfer has been used in upper brachial plexus injury and is potentially effective for isolated axillary nerve injury in lieu of sural nerve grafting. We evaluated the functional outcome of this procedure and determined factors that influenced the outcome. METHODS A retrospective chart review was performed of 21 patients (mean age, 38 y; range, 16-79 y) who underwent triceps motor branch transfer for the treatment of isolated axillary nerve injury. Deltoid muscle strength was evaluated using the modified British Medical Research Council grading at the last follow-up (mean, 21 mo; range, 12-41 mo). The following variables were analyzed to determine whether they affected the outcome of the nerve transfer: the age and sex of the patient, delay from injury to surgery, body mass index (BMI), severity of trauma, and presence of rotator cuff lesions. The Spearman correlation coefficient and multiple linear regression were performed for statistical analysis. RESULTS The average Medical Research Council grade of deltoid muscle strength was 3.5 ± 1.1. Deltoid muscle strength correlated with the age of the patient, delay from injury to surgery, and BMI of the patient. Five patients failed to achieve more than M3 grade. Among them, 4 patients were older than 50 years and 1 was treated 14 months after injury. In the multiple linear regression model, the delay from injury to surgery, age of the patient, and BMI of the patient were the important factors, in that order, that affected the outcome of this procedure. CONCLUSIONS Isolated axillary nerve injury can be treated successfully with triceps motor branch transfer. However, outstanding outcomes are not universal, with one fourth failing to achieve M3 strength. The outcome of this procedure is affected by the delay from injury to surgery and the age and BMI of the patient.

Measuring outcomes in adult brachial plexus reconstruction.

The focus of this article is on evaluating the various outcome measures of surgical interventions for adult brachial plexus injuries. From a surgeons perspective, the goals of surgery have largely focused on the return of motor function and restoration of protective sensation. From a patients perspective, alleviation of pain, cosmesis, return to work, and emotional state are also important. The ideal outcome measure should be valid, reliable, responsive, unbiased, appropriate, and easy. The author outlines pitfalls and benefits of current outcome measures and offers thoughts on possible future measures.

Iatrogenic Nerve Injuries During Shoulder Surgery

INTRODUCTION The current literature indicates that neurologic injuries during shoulder surgery occur infrequently and result in little if any morbidity. The purpose of this study was to review one institutions experience treating patients with iatrogenic nerve injuries after shoulder surgery. METHODS A retrospective review of the records of patients evaluated in a brachial plexus specialty clinic from 2000 to 2010 identified twenty-six patients with iatrogenic nerve injury secondary to shoulder surgery. The records were reviewed to determine the operative procedure, time to presentation, findings on physical examination, treatment, and outcome. RESULTS The average age was forty-three years (range, seventeen to seventy-two years), and the average delay prior to referral was 5.4 months (range, one to fifteen months). Seven nerve injuries resulted from open procedures done to treat instability; nine, from arthroscopic surgery; four, from total shoulder arthroplasty; and six, from a combined open and arthroscopic operation. The injury occurred at the level of the brachial plexus in thirteen patients and at a terminal nerve branch in thirteen. Fifteen patients (58%) did not recover nerve function after observation and required surgical management. A structural nerve injury (laceration or suture entrapment) occurred in nine patients (35%), including eight of the thirteen who presented with a terminal nerve branch injury and one of the thirteen who presented with an injury at the level of the brachial plexus. CONCLUSIONS Nerve injuries occurring during shoulder surgery can produce severe morbidity and may require surgical management. Injuries at the level of a peripheral nerve are more likely to be surgically treatable than injuries of the brachial plexus. A high index of suspicion and early referral and evaluation should be considered when evaluating patients with iatrogenic neurologic deficits after shoulder surgery.

Posterior branch of the axillary nerve transfer to the lateral triceps branch for restoration of elbow extension: case report.

We report a nerve transfer to the triceps using the posterior branch of the axillary nerve to restore elbow extension in an 18-year-old woman with a C7-T1 injury. Elbow extension strength improved from M0 to M4, whereas deltoid strength was minimally affected. Her Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score improved 14 points. This method may be considered for restoring triceps function in lower pattern brachial plexus injury.

Free Functioning Gracilis Muscle Transfer versus Intercostal Nerve Transfer to Musculocutaneous Nerve for Restoration of Elbow Flexion after Traumatic Adult Brachial Pan-Plexus Injury.

Background: After complete five-level root brachial plexus injury, free functional muscle transfer and intercostal nerve transfer to the musculocutaneous nerve are two potential reconstructive options for elbow flexion. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of free functional muscle transfer versus intercostal nerve–to–musculocutaneous nerve transfers with respect to strength. Methods: Sixty-two patients who underwent free functional muscle transfer reconstruction or intercostal nerve–to–musculocutaneous nerve transfer for elbow flexion following a pan-plexus injury were included. The two groups were compared with respect to postoperative elbow flexion strength according to the British Medical Research Council grading system; preoperative and postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire scores. Results: In the free functional muscle transfer group, 67.7 percent of patients achieved M3 or M4 elbow flexion. In the intercostal nerve–to–musculocutaneous nerve transfer group, 41.9 percent of patients achieved M3 or M4 elbow flexion. The difference was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Changes in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire scores were not statistically significant. Average time from injury to surgery was significantly different (p < 0.01) in both groups. The number of intercostal nerves used for the musculocutaneous nerve transfer did not correlate with better elbow flexion grade. Conclusions: Based on this study, gracilis free functional muscle transfer reconstruction achieves better elbow flexion strength than intercostal nerve–to–musculocutaneous nerve transfer for elbow flexion after pan-plexus injury. The role of gracilis free functional muscle transfer should be carefully considered in acute reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Wrist, First Carpometacarpal Joint, and Thumb Interphalangeal Joint Arthrodesis in Patients With Brachial Plexus Injuries

PURPOSE Wrist arthrodesis, first carpometacarpal joint arthrodesis, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodesis can be used in conjunction with other reconstructive measures to improve function and grasp in patients with complete brachial plexus injuries. This study evaluates wrist arthrodesis, first carpometacarpal joint arthrodesis, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodesis as measured by fusion rate, complications, and clinical outcomes. METHODS A retrospective chart review was performed for 24 skeletally mature patients with brachial plexus injuries treated with wrist arthrodesis by a dorsal plating technique, first carpometacarpal joint arthrodesis by staples, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodesis by a tension band wiring technique. Nineteen patients were subjectively evaluated using prearthrodesis and postarthrodesis Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand scores, visual analog pain scores, and a visual analog scale assessing appearance, function, hygiene, ease of daily care, pain, and overall satisfaction. RESULTS There was 100% union rate with 1 postarthrodesis complication. One patient required wrist fusion plate removal because of painful hardware. Subjective patient assessments showed a statistically significant (P < .001) improvement in Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand scores (from 51 to 28) and pain scores (from 5.3 to 3.2) before and after arthrodeses. The visual analog questionnaire results revealed improvements in appearance, function, daily cares, hygiene, pain, and satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS Wrist arthrodesis, first carpometacarpal joint arthrodesis, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodesis had high union rates with minimal complications. Patients benefited from the improved function of their upper extremities and were satisfied with the surgery. The use of wrist, first carpometacarpal joint, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodeses in combination should be considered one of the reconstructive possibilities for patients with complete or nearly complete brachial plexus injuries.

Concomitant Traumatic Spinal Cord and Brachial Plexus Injuries in Adult Patients

BACKGROUND Combined injuries to the spinal cord and brachial plexus present challenges in the detection of both injuries as well as to subsequent treatment. The purpose of this study is to describe the epidemiology and clinical factors of concomitant spinal cord injuries in patients with a known brachial plexus injury. METHODS A retrospective review was performed on all patients who were evaluated for a brachial plexus injury in a tertiary, multidisciplinary brachial plexus clinic from January 2000 to December 2008. Patients with clinical and/or imaging findings for a coexistent spinal cord injury were identified and underwent further analysis. RESULTS A total of 255 adult patients were evaluated for a traumatic traction injury to the brachial plexus. We identified thirty-one patients with a combined brachial plexus and spinal cord injury, for a prevalence of 12.2%. A preganglionic brachial plexus injury had been sustained in all cases. The combined injury group had a statistically greater likelihood of having a supraclavicular vascular injury (odds ratio [OR] = 22.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9, 271.9) and a cervical spine fracture (OR = 3.44; 95% CI = 1.6, 7.5). These patients were also more likely to exhibit a Horner sign (OR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.5, 7.2) and phrenic nerve dysfunction (OR = 2.5; 95% CI = 1.0, 5.8) compared with the group with only a brachial plexus injury. CONCLUSION Heightened awareness for a combined spinal cord and brachial plexus injury and the presence of various associated clinical and imaging findings may aid in the early recognition of these relatively uncommon injuries.

A Comparison of Outcomes of Triceps Motor Branch-to-Axillary Nerve Transfer or Sural Nerve Interpositional Grafting for Isolated Axillary Nerve Injury.

Background: Deltoid paralysis following isolated axillary nerve injury can be managed with triceps motor branch transfer or interpositional grafting. No consensus exists on the treatment that results in superior deltoid function. The purpose of this study was to review the authors’ experience with axillary nerve injury management and compare functional outcomes following these two treatment options. Methods: Twenty-nine adult isolated axillary nerve injury patients that had either interpositional nerve grafting or triceps motor branch transfer with greater than 1 year of follow-up between 2002 and 2013 were reviewed for demographic and clinical factors and functional outcomes of deltoid reinnervation, including clinical examination (shoulder abduction and forward flexion graded by the Medical Research Council system) and electromyographic recovery. Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale grades were also compared. Results: Twenty-one patients had a triceps motor transfer and eight had interpositional nerve grafting. At a mean follow-up of 22 months, Medical Research Council scores were greater in the grafting group compared with the nerve transfer group (4.3 versus 3.0), and more graft patients achieved useful deltoid function (Medical Research Council score ≥3) recovery (100 percent versus 62 percent); however, both groups had similar improvement in self-reported disability: change in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score of 11 following nerve transfer versus 15 following nerve graft. Conclusions: Although the question of nerve transfer versus grafting for restoration of axillary nerve function is controversial, this study demonstrates that grafting can result in good objective functional outcomes, particularly during an earlier time course after injury. This question requires further investigation in a larger, prospective patient population. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.