Comparison between partial ulnar and intercostal nerve trans
-
Christopher
- Posts: 845
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 10:09 pm
- Injury Description, Date, extent, surgical intervention etc: Date of Injury: 12/15/02
Level of Injury:
-dominant side C5, C6, & C7 avulsed. C8 & T1 stretched & crushed
BPI Related Surgeries:
-2 Intercostal nerves grafted to Biceps muscle,
-Free-Gracilis muscle transfer to Biceps Region innervated with 2 Intercostal nerves grafts.
-2 Sural nerves harvested from both Calves for nerve grafting.
-Partial Ulnar nerve grafted to Long Triceps.
-Uninjured C7 Hemi-Contralateral cross-over to Deltoid muscle.
-Wrist flexor tendon transfer to middle, ring, & pinky finger extensors.
Surgical medical facility:
Brachial Plexus Clinic at The Mayo Clinic, Rochester MN
(all surgeries successful)
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."
~Theodore Roosevelt - Location: Los Angeles, California USA
Comparison between partial ulnar and intercostal nerve trans
http://www.jbppni.com/content/5/1/4
full study is available on above website. Unable to attach pdf files here.Comparison between partial ulnar and intercostal nerve transfers for reconstructing elbow flexion in patients with upper brachial plexus injuries
Ryosuke Kakinoki email, Ryosuke Ikeguchi email, Scott FM Duncan email, Ken Nakayama email, Taiichi Matsumoto email, Soichi Ohta email and Takashi Nakamura email
Journal of Brachial Plexus and Peripheral Nerve Injury 2010, 5:4doi:10.1186/1749-7221-5-4
Published: 26 January 2010
Abstract (provisional)
Background
There have been several reports that partial ulnar transfer (PUNT) is preferable for reconstructing elbow flexion in patients with upper brachial plexus injuries (BPIs) compared with intercostal nerve transfer (ICNT). The purpose of this study was to compare the recovery of elbow flexion between patients subjected to PUNT and patients subjected to ICNT.
Methods
Sixteen patients (13 men and three women) with BPIs for whom PUNT (eight patients) or ICNT (eight patients) had been performed to restore elbow flexion function were studied. The time required in obtaining M1, M3 (Medical Research Council scale grades recovery) for elbow flexion and a full range of elbow joint movement against gravity with the wrist and fingers extended maximally and the outcomes of a manual muscle test (MMT) for elbow flexion were examined in both groups.
Results
There were no significant differences between the PUNT and ICNT groups in terms of the age of patients at the time of surgery or the interval between injury and surgery. There were significantly more injured nerve roots in the ICNT group (mean 3.6) than in the PUNT group (mean 2.1) (P = 0.0006). The times required to obtain grades M1 and M3 in elbow flexion were significantly shorter in the PUNT group than in the ICNT group (P = 0.04 for M1 and P = 0.002 for M3). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the time required to obtain full flexion of the elbow joint with maximally extended fingers and wrist or in the final MMT scores for elbow flexion.
Conclusions
PUNT is technically easy, not associated with significant complications, and provides rapid recovery of the elbow flexion. However, separation of elbow flexion from finger and wrist motions needed more time in the PUNT group than in the ICNT group. Although the final mean MMT score for elbow flexion in the PUNT group was greater than in the ICNT group, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups.
The complete article is available as a provisional PDF.
