Axillary nerve neurotization with the anterior deltopectoral approach in brachial plexus injuries

Combined neurotization of both axillary and suprascapular nerves in shoulder reanimation has been widely accepted in brachial plexus injuries, and the functional outcome is much superior to single nerve transfer. This study describes the surgical anatomy for axillary nerve relative to the available donor nerves and emphasize the salient technical aspects of anterior deltopectoral approach in brachial plexus injuries. Fifteen patients with brachial plexus injury who had axillary nerve neurotizations were evaluated. Five patients had complete avulsion, 9 patients had C5, six patients had brachial plexus injury pattern, and one patient had combined axillary and suprascapular nerve injury. The long head of triceps branch was the donor in C5,6 injuries; nerve to brachialis in combined nerve injury and intercostals for C5‐T1 avulsion injuries. All these donors were identified through the anterior approach, and the nerve transfer was done. The recovery of deltoid was found excellent (M5) in C5,6 brachial plexus injuries with an average of 134.4° abduction at follow up of average 34.6 months. The shoulder recovery was good with 130° abduction in a case of combined axillary and suprascapular nerve injury. The deltoid recovery was good (M3) in C5‐T1 avulsion injuries patients with an average of 64° shoulder abduction at follow up of 35 months. We believe that anterior approach is simple and easy for all axillary nerve transfers in brachial plexus injuries. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery, 2012.     

Surgical outcomes following nerve transfers in upper brachial plexus injuries

Background:

Brachial plexus injuries represent devastating injuries with a poor prognosis. Neurolysis, nerve repair, nerve grafts, nerve transfer, functioning free-muscle transfer and pedicle muscle transfer are the main surgical procedures for treating these injuries. Among these, nerve transfer or neurotization is mainly indicated in root avulsion injury.

Materials and Methods:

We analysed the results of various neurotization techniques in 20 patients (age group 20-41 years, mean 25.7 years) in terms of denervation time, recovery time and functional results. The inclusion criteria for the study included irreparable injuries to the upper roots of brachial plexus (C5, C6 and C7 roots in various combinations), surgery within 10 months of injury and a minimum follow-up period of 18 months. The average denervation period was 4.2 months. Shoulder functions were restored by transfer of spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve (19 patients), and phrenic nerve to suprascapular nerve (1 patient). In 11 patients, axillary nerve was also neurotized using different donors - radial nerve branch to the long head triceps (7 patients), intercostal nerves (2 patients), and phrenic nerve with nerve graft (2 patients). Elbow flexion was restored by transfer of ulnar nerve motor fascicle to the motor branch of biceps (4 patients), both ulnar and median nerve motor fascicles to the biceps and brachialis motor nerves (10 patients), spinal accessory nerve to musculocutaneous nerve with an intervening sural nerve graft (1 patient), intercostal nerves (3rd, 4th and 5th) to musculocutaneous nerve (4 patients) and phrenic nerve to musculocutaneous nerve with an intervening graft (1 patient).

Results:

Motor and sensory recovery was assessed according to Medical Research Council (MRC) Scoring system. In shoulder abduction, five patients scored M4 and three patients M3+. Fair results were obtained in remaining 12 patients. The achieved abduction averaged 95 degrees (range, 50 - 170 degrees). Eight patients scored M4 power in elbow flexion and assessed as excellent results. Good results (M3+) were obtained in seven patients. Five patients had fair results (M2+ to M3).     

Surgical treatment for total root avulsion type brachial plexus injuries by neurotization: A prospective comparison study between total and hemicontralateral C7 nerve root transfer

Purpose: We conducted a clinical study to evaluate the effects of neurotization, especially comparing the total contralateral C7 (CC7) root transfer to hemi‐CC7 transfer, on total root avulsion brachial plexus injuries (BPI). Methods: Forty patients who received neurotization for BPI were enrolled in this prospective study. Group 1 (n = 20) received hemi‐CC7 transfer for hand function, while group 2 (n = 20) received total‐CC7 transfer. Additional neurotization included spinal accessory, phrenic, and intercostal nerve transfer for shoulder and elbow function. The results were evaluated with an average of 6 years follow‐up. Results: Group 1 had fewer donor site complications (15%) than group 2 (45%); group 2 had significantly better hand M3 and M4 motor function (65%) than group 1 (30%; P = 0.02). There was no difference in sensory recovery. Significantly, better shoulder function was obtained by simultaneous neurotization on both suprascapular and axillary nerves. Conclusions: Total‐CC7 transfer had better hand recovery but more donor complications than hemi‐CC7. Neurotization on both supra‐scapular and axillary nerves improved shoulder recovery. © 2013 The Authors. Microsurgery published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 34:91–101, 2014.     

Transfer of the accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve in brachial plexus reconstruction

PURPOSE: Transfer of the accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve is a common procedure, performed to reestablish shoulder motion in patients with brachial plexus palsy. We propose dissecting both nerves via a distal oblique supraclavicular incision, which can be prolonged up to the scapular notch. The results of the transfer to the suprascapular nerve are compared with those of the combined repair of the suprascapular and axillary nerves. METHODS: Thirty men between the ages of 18 and 37 years with brachial plexus trauma had reparative surgery within 3 to 10 months of their injuries. In partial injuries with a normal triceps, a triceps motor branch transfer to the axillary nerve was performed. The suprascapular and accessory nerves were dissected via an oblique incision, extending from the point at which the plexus crosses the clavicle to the anterior border of the trapezius muscle. In 10 patients with fractures or dislocations of the clavicle, the trapezius muscle was partially elevated to expose the suprascapular nerve at the suprascapular notch. RESULTS: In all cases, transfer of the accessory to the suprascapular nerve was performed without the need for nerve grafts. A double lesion of the suprascapular nerve was identified in 1 patient with clavicular dislocation. In those with total palsy, the average improvement in range of abduction was 45 degrees , but none of the patients with total palsy recovered any active external rotation. Patients with upper-type injury recovered an average of 105 degrees of abduction and external rotation. If only patients with C5-C6 injuries were considered, the range of abduction and external rotation increased to 122 degrees and 118 degrees , respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the accessory nerve for transfer to the suprascapular nerve ensured adequate return of shoulder function, especially when combined with a triceps motor branch transfer to the axillary nerve. The supraclavicular exposure proposed here for the suprascapular and accessory nerves is advantageous and can be extended easily to explore the suprascapular nerve at the scapular notch.     

Posterior Approach for Double Nerve Transfer for Restoration of Shoulder Function in Upper Brachial Plexus Palsy

Restoration of shoulder function is one of the most critical goals of treatment of brachial plexus injuries. Primary repair or nerve grafting of avulsion injuries of the upper brachial plexus in adults often leads to poor recovery. Nerve transfers have provided an alternative treatment with great potential for improved return of function. Many different nerves have been utilized as donor nerves for transfer to the suprascapular nerve and axillary nerve for return of shoulder function with variable results. As our knowledge of shoulder neuromuscular anatomy and physiology improves and our experience with nerve transfers increases, so evolve the specific transfer procedures. This article presents a technique and rationale for reconstructing shoulder function by transferring the distal spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve and the nerve branch to the medial head of the triceps to the axillary nerve, both through a posterior approach.     

Surgical treatment of brachial plexus posterior cord lesion: A combination of nerve and tendon transfers,about nine patients

Lesions of the posterior cord of the brachial plexus are rare. The symptoms are usually described as palsy of the deltoid and triceps brachii muscles and of the extensor muscles of the wrist, thumb and fingers. If there is no recovery, our strategy is to operate on these patients 6 months after the injury using a combination of nerve and tendon transfers. We present a series of nine patients, two with a partial palsy and seven with a complete palsy of the posterior cord. We performed five nerve transfers to the axillary nerve, four using intercostal nerves and one using the ulnar nerve. Six patients benefited from a transfer to one of the nerves to the triceps brachii (medial or lateral head), five using the ulnar nerve and one using two intercostal nerves. We performed eight tendon transfers for radial palsy. The results demonstrated significant restoration of the deltoid muscle (grade 4 strength, mean active abduction of 120°). Active elbow extension was restored in all patients with an average strength measured at 5.6 kg and 48% of the contralateral strength. All tendon transfers were successful with recovery of active wrist extension (40°), long fingers extension and thumb abduction and extension (12.5 cm between the tips of index and thumb). With this method, we were able to restore function to the upper limb of patients who presented with debilitating palsy of the posterior cord of the brachial plexus.     

Results of nerve transfer techniques for restoration of shoulder and elbow function in the context of a meta-analysis of the English literature

We report the results of 15 patients who underwent nerve transfer for restoration of shoulder and elbow function at our institution for traumatic brachial plexus palsy. We present these results in the context of a meta-analysis of the English literature, designed to quantitatively assess the efficacy of individual nerve transfers for restoration of elbow and shoulder function in a large number of patients. One thousand eighty-eight nerve transfers from 27 studies met the inclusion criteria of the analysis. Seventy-two percent of direct intercostal to musculocutaneous transfers (without interposition nerve grafts) achieved biceps strength > or =M3 versus 47% using interposition grafts. Direct intercostal transfers to the musculocutaneous nerve had a better ability to achieve > or =M4 elbow strength than transfers from the spinal accessory nerve (41% vs 29%). The suprascapular nerve fared significantly better than the axillary nerve in obtaining > or =M3 shoulder abduction (92% vs 69%). At our institution 90% of intercostal to musculocutaneous transfers (n = 10) achieved > or =M3 bicep strength and 70% achieved > or =M4 strength. Four of seven patients achieved > or =M3 shoulder abduction with a single nerve transfer and 6 of 7 regained > or =M3 strength with a dual nerve transfer. This study suggests that interposition nerve grafts should be avoided when possible when performing nerve transfers. Better results for restoration of elbow flexion have been attained with intercostal to musculocutaneous transfers than with spinal accessory nerve transfers and spinal accessory to suprascapular transfers appear to have the best outcomes for return of shoulder abduction. We conclude that nerve transfer is an effective means to restore elbow and shoulder function in brachial plexus paralysis.     

联合尺神经束支和臂丛外神经移位治疗臂丛损伤

目的 观察联合尺神经束支和臂丛外神经移位治疗臂丛损伤的临床效果.方法 臂丛损伤6例,其中单纯上干损伤4例;上中干为主,合并下干部分损伤2例.伤后平均2.8个月接受手术.术式包括尺神经部分束支转位至肌皮神经肱二头肌肌支,膈神经或者副神经斜方肌支转位至肩胛上神经,桡神经肱三头肌长头肌支转位修复腋神经肌支.用肱二头肌、岗上肌和三角肌肌力,肩外展和上举角度,尺神经功能损失等指标对手术方式和效果进行评估.结果 6例中5例得到随访,平均随访时间18个月,肱二头肌均在术后3～4个月开始恢复肌力.随访时间18个月以上的4例屈肘M_4~+～M_5;随访时间4个月的1例屈肘M_3~+.其中3例行外展功能重建,单用膈神经修复的病例上臂可上举至180°,外展肌力M_4~+;联合副神经和肱三头肌长头肌支修复的病例上肢可外展90°,肌力M_4~-;单用副神经修复的病例上肢可外展80°,肌力M_3~+.3例手部握持力与术前相同,2例增强.4例手部尺神经供区功能无明显影响,1例小指掌侧皮肤感觉减退,第一骨间背侧肌萎缩.结论 尺神经部分束支转位修复肱二头肌支可以有效的恢复臂丛损伤后屈肘功能;用膈神经修复肩胛上神经可能取得更好的肩外展和上举效果;本组臂丛下干部分损伤的病例受伤均在3个月内,采用此术式同样恢复了肱二头肌功能,未加重原有的手功能障碍.     

Nerve transfer in brachial plexus injuries--comparative analysis of surgical procedures

Nerve transfer is the only possibility for nerve repair in cases of the brachial plexus traction injuries with spinal roots avulsion. From 1980. until 2000. in Institute of Neurosurgery, Clinical Center of Serbia, nerve transfer has been performed in 127(79%) of 159 patients with traction injuries of brachial plexus, i.e., 204 reinnervation procedures has been performed using different donor nerves. We achieved good or satisfactory arm abduction and full range or satisfactory elbow flexion through reinnervation of the axillary and musculocutaneous nerve using different donor nerves in 143 of 204 reinnervations, which presents general rate of useful functional recovery in 70.1% of cases. Mean values of the rate of useful functional recovery in individual modalities of nerve transfer in our series are 50.1% for intercostal and/or spinal accessory nerve transfer, 64.5% for plexo-plexal nerve transfer, 81.7% for regional nerve transfer, and 87.1% for combine nerve transfer.     

多组神经移位治疗臂丛上、中干根性撕脱伤重建肩外展及屈肘功能

目的 观察联合应用多组神经移位治疗臂丛上、中干根性撕脱伤的临床效果。方法 我科于2012年4月至2014年4月收治臂丛上、中干根性撕脱伤损伤患者16例,采用副神经斜方肌肌支移位修复肩胛上神经、桡神经肱三头肌长头支移位修复腋神经肌支及Oberlin术式,联合修复臂丛上、中干根性撕脱伤,恢复肩外展及屈肘功能。术后随访采用DASH评分表进行手术疗效评估。结果 术后16例患者中14例得到随访。随访24—28个月(平均25个月),患者肩关节外展恢复至75°-90°,恢复时间9-18个月(平均14个月)。屈肘恢复至100°-160°,恢复时间4-7.5个月（平均5.8个月）。DASH评分8-14分,平均14.6分。结论 臂丛上、中干损伤使用多组神经移位联合治疗,可较好恢复肩外展及屈肘功能,尺神经部分束支移位修复肌皮神经肱二头肌支对手内在肌功能无明显影响。     

Use of intercostal nerves for different target neurotization in brachial plexus reconstruction

Intercostal nerve transfer is a valuable procedure in devastating plexopathies. Intercostal nerves are a very good choice for elbow flexion or extension and shoulder abduction when the intraplexus donor nerves are not available. The best results are obtained in obstetric brachial plexus palsy patients, when direct nerve transfer is performed within six months from the injury. Unlike the adult posttraumatic patients after median and ulnar nerve neurotization with intercostal nerves, almost all obstetric brachial plexus palsy patients achieve protective sensation in the hand and some of them achieve active wrist and finger flexion. Use in combination with proper muscles, intercostal nerve transfer can yield adequate power to the paretic upper limb. Reinnervation of native muscles (i.e., latissimus dorsi) should always be sought as they can successfully be transferred later on for further functional restoration.     

Contralateral C7 nerve root transfer to neurotize the upper trunk via a modified prespinal route in repair of brachial plexus avulsion injury

Purpose: In this report, we present our experience on the repair of brachial plexus root avulsion injuries with the use of contralateral C7 nerve root transfers with nerve grafting through a modified prespinal route. Methods: The outcomes of the contralateral C7 nerve root transfer to neurotize the upper trunk and C5/C6 nerve roots of the total or near total brachial plexus nerve root avulsion injury in a series of 41 patients were evaluated. The contralateral C7 nerve root that was dissected to the distal end of the divisions, along with the sural nerve graft, were placed underneath the anterior scalene and longus colli muscles, and then passed through the retro‐esophageal space to neurotize the recipient nerve. The mean length of the dissected contralateral C7 nerve root was 6.5 ± 0.7 cm, and the mean length of sural nerve graft was 6.8 ± 1.9 cm. The suprascapular nerve was neurotized additionally by the phrenic nerve or the terminal motor branch of accessory nerve in some patients. Results: The mean length of the follow‐up was 47.2 ± 14.5 months. The muscle strength was graded M4 or M3 for the biceps muscle in 85.4% of patients, for the deltoid muscle in 82.9% of patients, and for the upper parts of pectoral major in 92.7% of patients. The functional recovery of shoulder abduction in the patients with the additional suprascapular nerve neurotization was remarkably improved. Conclusions: The modified prespinal route could significantly reduced the length of nerve graft in the contralateral C7 nerve root transfer to the injured upper trunk in brachial plexus root avulsion injury, and it may improve the functional outcomes, which deserves further investigations. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery, 2012.     

Effect of a lateral infraclavicular brachial plexus block on the axillary and suprascapular nerves as determined by electromyography – a cohort study

We aimed to examine to what extent a lateral infraclavicular brachial plexus block affected the axillary and the suprascapular nerve. We included patients undergoing hand surgery anaesthetised with a lateral infraclavicular brachial plexus block. Our primary outcome was the relative change in surface electromyography during maximum voluntary isometric contraction of the medial deltoid muscle (axillary nerve) and the infraspinatus muscle (suprascapular nerve) from baseline to 30 min after the block procedure. A reduction in electromyography of > 50% defined a successful block. The impact of the block on the shoulder nerves was compared with the surgical target nerves of the arm and hand (musculocutaneous, radial, median and ulnar nerves). Twenty patients were included. The medians of the relative changes in the surface electromyography were significantly reduced (both p < 0.001) with 92% for the deltoid muscle and 30% for the infraspinatus muscle, respectively. In total, 18 out of 20 patients had reductions > 50% for the deltoid muscle, which was significantly different from the infraspinatus muscle, where the proportion was 5 out of 20 (p < 0.001). The medians of the relative reductions in electromyography for the arm and hand muscles were 90–96%, similar to the effect on the deltoid muscle. Our results suggest that a lateral infraclavicular block provides block of the axillary nerve comparable to the block of the surgical target nerves. The suprascapular nerve is blocked to a lesser degree. Combining a lateral infraclavicular brachial plexus block with a selective suprascapular block for shoulder surgery warrants further studies.     

Shoulder reanimation in posttraumatic brachial plexus paralysis

Introduction

Posttraumatic brachial plexus paralysis invariably involves the upper roots leading to paralysis of the shoulder region musculature. Early neurotisation of the suprascapular and the axillary nerve should be one of the priorities in plexus reconstruction in order to reanimate the shoulder.

Patients and methods

From 1998 to 2007, 78 patients with posttraumatic brachial plexus palsy were operated in our department. Forty-three patients presented with supraclavicular lesions with involvement of C5 and C6 roots in all cases. Reconstruction of the shoulder function was achieved with neurotisation of the suprascapular nerve in 41 patients. Extraplexus donors were utilised in 34 patients, while intraplexus donors via nerve grafts in 7 patients. Neurotisation of the axillary nerve was performed in 25 patients, utilising intraplexus donors in 16 patients, extraplexus donors in 4, and combination of intraplexus and extraplexus donors in 5 patients.

Results

Suprascapular nerve neurotisation gave good or excellent results (supraspinatus > M3+ or shoulder abduction > 40°) in 35 patients. Intraplexus donors regained good or excellent function in 5 out of 6 patients (83%), while extraplexus neurotisations achieved good or excellent function of the supraspinatus in 30 out of 34 patients (88%). Axillary nerve neurotisation offered good or excellent results (deltoid > M3+ or shoulder abduction > 60°) in 14 patients (58%). Direct neurotisation of the axillary nerve via the motor branch for the long head of the triceps gave shoulder abduction of >110°, as well as external rotation of >30° in 3 out of 5 patients. Combined neurotisation of suprascapular and axillary nerves gave the best outcome achieving shoulder abduction of >60° as well as external rotation of >30°.

Conclusions

Shoulder reanimation should be one of the first priorities in brachial plexus reconstruction. Early neurotisation of the suprascapular, and if possible the axillary nerve offers the best outcome.     

Evaluation of suprascapular nerve neurotization after nerve graft or transfer in the treatment of brachial plexus traction lesions

OBJECT: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the restoration of shoulder function by means of suprascapular nerve neurotization in adult patients with proximal C-5 and C-6 lesions due to a severe brachial plexus traction injury. The primary goal of brachial plexus reconstructive surgery was to restore biceps muscle function and, secondarily, to reanimate shoulder function. METHODS: Suprascapular nerve neurotization was performed by grafting the C-5 nerve in 24 patients and by accessory or hypoglossal nerve transfer in 29 patients. Additional neurotization involving the axillary nerve was performed in 18 patients. Postoperative needle electromyography studies of the supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and deltoid muscles showed signs of reinnervation in most patients; however, active glenohumeral shoulder function recovery was poor. In nine (17%) of 53 patients supraspinatus muscle strength was Medical Research Council (MRC) Grade 3 or 4 and in four patients (8%) infraspinatus muscle power was MRC Grade 3 or 4. In 18 patients in whom deltoid muscle reinnervation was attempted, MRC Grade 3 or 4 function was demonstrated in two (11%). In the overall group, eight patients (15%) exhibited glenohumeral abduction with a mean of 44 +/- 17 degrees (standard deviation [SD]; median 45 degrees) and four patients (8%) exhibited glenohumeral exorotation with a mean of 48 +/- 24 degrees (SD; median 53 degrees). In only three patients (6%) were both functions regained. CONCLUSIONS: The reanimation of shoulder function in patients with proximal C-5 and C-6 brachial plexus traction injuries following suprascapular nerve neurotization is disappointingly low.     

多组神经束支部移位治疗臂丛神经上干损伤的近期疗效

目的 通过在各受区神经近入肌点处同时进行多组神经束支部移位,恢复臂丛神经上干损伤后丧失的肩肘功能.方法 2007年2月-9月,收治4例单纯臂丛神经上干损伤男性患者.年龄21～39岁.均为车祸伤.左侧1例,右侧3例.患侧肩关节外展、外旋、上举及屈肘不能;耸肩、伸肘、屈伸腕指肌力≥4级.肌电图检查:副神经、尺神经及肱三头肌长头肌支功能好;正中神经功能轻度受损.患者于伤后3～11个月入院.于全麻下行后路副神经到肩胛上神经、肱三头肌肌支到腋神经、尺神经部分束支到肱二头肌肌支和/或正中神经部分束支到肱肌肌支移位术.结果 术后切口均Ⅰ期愈合,其中1例术后出现手部尺侧麻木症状,经对症处理后症状消失.余患者未出现与供区神经相关的运动、感觉功能受损症状.4例均获随访,随访时间7～12个月.术后3～4个月患侧均出现肩外展、屈肘动作.肌电图显示3组受区肌肉均可记录到新生电位.术后6～7个月,患者肩外展30～65°,屈肘90～120°,肌力3～4级.1例随访12个月患者肩外展、上举、外旋及届肘主动活动度基本正常,三角肌、肱二头肌外形轮廓接近正常.结论 应用功能相近的供体神经进行多组神经束支部移位具有供区损失小、恢复时间快、功能恢复佳等优点.尤其适合因伤后时间长延误治疗及锁骨上探查有风险的臂丛神经上干损伤患者.     

The risk of suprascapular and axillary nerve injury in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: An anatomic study

PurposeImplantation of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) places the axillary and suprascapular nerves at risk. The aim of this anatomic study was to digitally analyse the location of these nerves in relation to bony landmarks in order to predict their path and thereby help to reduce the risk of neurological complications during the procedure.MethodsA total of 22 human cadaveric shoulder specimens were used in this study. The axillary and suprascapular nerves were dissected, and radiopaque threads were sutured onto the nerves without mobilizing the nerves from their native paths. Then, 3D X-ray scans of the specimens were performed, and the distance of the nerves to bony landmarks at the humerus and the glenoid were measured.ResultsThe distance of the inferior glenoid rim to the axillary nerve averaged 13.6 mm (5.8–27.0 mm, ±5.1 mm). In the anteroposterior direction, the distance between the axillary nerve and the humeral metaphysis averaged 8.1 mm (0.6–21.3 mm, ±6.5 mm).The distance of the glenoid centre to the suprascapular nerve passing point under the transverse scapular ligament measured 28.4 mm (18.9–35.1 mm, ±3.8 mm) in the mediolateral direction and 10.8 mm (−4.8 to 25.3 mm, ±6.1 mm) in the anteroposterior direction. The distance to the spinoglenoid notch was 16.6 mm (11.1–24.9 mm, ±3.4 mm) in the mediolateral direction and −11.8 mm posterior (−19.3 to −4.7 mm, ±4.7 mm) in the anteroposterior direction.ConclusionsImplantation of rTSA components endangers the axillary nerve because of its proximity to the humeral metaphysis and the inferior glenoid rim. Posterior and superior drilling and extraosseous screw placement during glenoid baseplate implantation in rTSA place the suprascapular nerve at risk, with safe zones to the nerve passing the spinoglenoid notch of 11 mm and to the suprascapular notch of 19 mm.     

肋间神经移位肩胛上神经的解剖学研究

目的探讨第3～6肋间神经移位肩胛上神经重建肩关节外展功能的可行性。方法取15具30侧成人躯干标本,解剖测量第3～6肋间神经自腋中线至锁骨中线可切取长度以及自腋中线至锁骨中点(拟定神经吻合点)的移位距离,并进行统计学比较。结果 30侧标本中,第3、4肋间神经均可切取自腋中线至锁骨中线范围内的全段神经,且可切取长度均较移位距离长(P<0.01)。6侧第5肋间神经及16侧第6肋间神经在未到达锁骨中线时被肋软骨覆盖,其中第5肋间神经可切取长度与移位距离相似(P>0.01),第6肋间神经可切取长度较移位距离短(P<0.01)。肩胛上神经通过游离切断,可翻转至锁骨中点下方2 cm以上。第5肋间神经切取长度与肩胛上神经翻转长度(2 cm)之和,可超过移位距离(P<0.01),但第6肋间神经总长度仍较移位距离短(P<0.01)。结论第3～5肋间神经可直接移位肩胛上神经重建肩关节外展功能,而第6肋间神经需增加游离切取长度范围或采用神经移植修复。     

Outcomes of Shoulder Functions in Spinal Accessory to Suprascapular Nerve Transfer in Brachial Plexus Injury: A Comparison between Anterior and Posterior Approach

Background  Restoration of shoulder functions is important in brachial plexus injury (BPI). The functional outcomes of spinal accessory nerve (SAN) to suprascapular nerve (SSN) transfer by the anterior supraclavicular approach and the posterior approach is a matter of debate. This article aims to compare the outcomes of the shoulder functions by the SAN to the SSN transfer using the two approaches. Methods  Retrospective data was collected in 34 patients who underwent SAN to SSN transfer from January 2016 to June 2018. Group A included 16 patients who underwent nerve transfers by anterior approach, and Group B included 18 patients who underwent nerve transfers by posterior approach. Functional outcomes were measured by grading the muscle power as per the British Medical Research Council (MRC) grading (graded as M) and the range of motions (ROM) of the shoulder at 6 months and 18 months. Results  Early recovery was seen in group B with 7 patients (39%) showing M1 abduction power at 6 months as compared with one patient (6%) in group A . This difference was statistically significant ( p value = 0.04). At 18 months, 10 patients (62%) in group A had good recovery (MRC grade ≥3), while 13 patients (72%) in group B had a good recovery. This difference was not found to be statistically significant (Fisher exact test p value = 0.71) There was no statistical difference in the outcomes of ROM in shoulder abduction, external rotation, and motor power at 18 months of follow-up. Conclusions  Early recovery was observed in the posterior approach group at 6 months, however, there was no significant difference in the outcomes of shoulder functions in muscle power and ROM in the two groups at 18 months of follow-up.     

The contralateral long thoracic nerve as a donor for upper brachial plexus neurotization procedures: cadaveric feasibility study

Object Various donor nerves, including the ipsilateral long thoracic nerve (LTN), have been used for brachial plexus neurotization procedures. Neurotization to proximal branches of the brachial plexus using the contralateral long thoracic nerve (LTN) has, to the authors' knowledge, not been previously explored. Methods In an attempt to identify an additional nerve donor candidate for proximal brachial plexus neurotization, the authors dissected the LTN in 8 adult human cadavers. The nerve was transected at its distal termination and then passed deep to the clavicle and axillary neurovascular bundle. This passed segment of nerve was then tunneled subcutaneously and contralaterally across the neck to a supra- and infraclavicular exposure of the suprascapular and musculocutaneous nerves. Measurements were made of the length and diameter of the LTN. Results All specimens were found to have a LTN that could be brought to the aforementioned contralateral nerves. Neural connections remained tension free with left and right neck rotation of ~ 45 degrees . The mean length of the LTN was 22 cm with a range of 18-27 cm. The overall mean diameter of this nerve was 3.0 mm. No gross evidence of injury to surrounding neurovascular structures was identified in any specimen. Conclusions Based on the results of this cadaveric study, the use of the contralateral LTN may be considered for neurotization of the proximal musculocutaneous and suprascapular nerves.