Atormac
Neurology India
menu-bar5 Open access journal indexed with Index Medicus
  Users online: 4935  
 Home | Login 
About Editorial board Articlesmenu-bullet NSI Publicationsmenu-bullet Search Instructions Online Submission Subscribe Videos Etcetera Contact
  Navigate Here 
 Search
 
  
 Resource Links
  »  Similar in PUBMED
 »  Search Pubmed for
 »  Search in Google Scholar for
 »Related articles
  »  Article in PDF (499 KB)
  »  Citation Manager
  »  Access Statistics
  »  Reader Comments
  »  Email Alert *
  »  Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this Article
 »  Abstract
 » Patients and Methods
 » Results
 » Discussion
 » Conclusion
 »  References
 »  Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1140    
    Printed42    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded22    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
Table of Contents    
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 67  |  Issue : 7  |  Page : 77-81

Functional outcome of spinal accessory nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve to restore shoulder function: Results in upper and complete traumatic brachial plexus palsy in adults


1 Peripheral Nerve Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosurgery, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
2 Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

Date of Web Publication23-Jan-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mario G Siqueira
Peripheral Nerve Surgery Unit, Department of Neurosurgery, University of São Paulo Medical School, Rua Virgilio de Carvalho Pinto, 381/ap. 42 05415-030 São Paulo, SP
Brazil
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.250708

Rights and Permissions

 » Abstract 


Background: Shoulder stability, abduction and external rotation are vital for the performance of usual daily tasks.
Aims: To compare the functional outcomes in the shoulder following spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer (SASNT).
Patients and Methods: Comparison of the outcome of adult patients with upper traumatic brachial plexus palsy undergoing SASNT with patients with complete palsy submitted to the same procedure.
Statistical Analysis: Ranges of motion were compared via the Mann-Whitney U test. The percentages of patients with a favorable outcome were compared by the chi-square test. All tests were two-tailed and P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Results: SASNT was performed in 76 patients: 23 cases (30.2%) of upper-plexus injuries and 53 cases (69.7%) of complete brachial plexus palsy. Good shoulder abduction was achieved in 15 patients (65.2%) with upper plexus palsy and a good external rotation in 5 (21.7%). In those patients with a good recovery, the average range of motion (ROM) was 53° for shoulder abduction and 71.2° for external rotation. Thirty-six patients (67.9%) with complete palsy had a good shoulder abduction recovery with 30.7° of average ROM, but only 3 patients (5.6%) recovered a good shoulder external rotation with 68.3° of average ROM. There was no statistical difference for the abduction outcome, but the external rotation outcome was superior in the upper plexus palsy group.
Conclusion: SASNT is a consistent procedure to achieve functional recovery of shoulder abduction after a partial or complete plexus injury, but the outcomes of external rotation were quite disappointing in both the groups.


Keywords: Brachial plexus palsy, brachial plexus surgery, nerve transfers
Key Message: Spinal accessory nerve transfer to suprascapular nerve achieves a good recovery of shoulder abduction in both partial or complete brachial plexus injury. However, external rotation at shoulder does not recover satisfactorily well in both the groups.


How to cite this article:
Siqueira MG, Martins RS, Solla D, Faglioni W, Foroni L, Heise CO. Functional outcome of spinal accessory nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve to restore shoulder function: Results in upper and complete traumatic brachial plexus palsy in adults. Neurol India 2019;67, Suppl S1:77-81

How to cite this URL:
Siqueira MG, Martins RS, Solla D, Faglioni W, Foroni L, Heise CO. Functional outcome of spinal accessory nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve to restore shoulder function: Results in upper and complete traumatic brachial plexus palsy in adults. Neurol India [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Oct 21];67, Suppl S1:77-81. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/text.asp?2019/67/7/77/250708




Shoulder stability, abduction and external rotation are vital for the performance of usual daily tasks, and important for optimizing more distal functions. In consequence, the restoration of these functions is one of the priorities in the surgical reconstruction of the injured brachial plexus.

To restore shoulder function, the spinal accessory nerve has been transferred to the suprascapular nerve (SASNT) for many years with highly variable results, ranging from 0 to 100% success for shoulder abduction and from 0 to 86.8% for external rotation.[1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19],[20],[21] Arguments for using the spinal accessory nerve as a donor for this transfer rely on four points: (1) It is a nerve almost entirely motor; (2) it has a high number of motor fibers (roughly 1700);[22] (3) its functional characteristics are relatively similar to those of the suprascapular nerve; (3) it is in close proximity to the suprascapular nerve; and, (4) its integrity is preserved in almost 95% of patients with traumatic brachial plexus palsy.[23]

It is mentioned in the literature that SASNT yields better results with upper-type versus total plexus palsies.[3] As our results in complete palsies appeared to be quite acceptable, at least for shoulder abduction, we decided to critically compare the functional outcomes in the shoulder following SASNT performed for both partial (upper) and complete traumatic lesions of the brachial plexus in adults.


 » Patients and Methods Top


After approval from the ethics committee of the University of São Paulo Medical School, the medical records of adult patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury operated upon within the Peripheral Nerve Surgery Unit over a period of nine years (2004-2012) were retrospectively reviewed, and all patients undergoing SASNT identified. The inclusion criteria for the study were: (1) the patients' age ≥18 years old; (2) lack of shoulder abduction and external rotation; (3) injury-to-surgery interval of less than 12 months; (4) normal trapezius muscle function; (5) lesion affecting C5, C6 in partial and complete plexus injuries; (6) no passive limitations in shoulder joint motion; (7) no secondary reconstruction in the shoulder region; and, (8) follow up of at least 18 months. Patients also submitted to a second transfer, linking a branch of the radial nerve to the triceps, to the axillary nerve (Somsak's procedure), to increase the shoulder abduction, were discarded as well.

Clinical assessment

The clinical assessments included measurement of the range of motion (ROM) of the shoulder via goniometry with the patient standing. To evaluate the range of shoulder abduction, the patient was asked to move the extended arm laterally against gravity and the angle formed between the arm axis and thorax was measured. When 30° of shoulder abduction is achieved, shoulder subluxation is usually corrected and it is possible to move the glenohumeral joint. Hence, this range of shoulder abduction and beyond were considered as a good functional result.[3],[24],[25] To measure the range of external rotation (the angle between the forearm and abdomen), the patient was instructed to start movement with the shoulder fully internally rotated and the forearm actively or passively flexed 90 degrees and placed transversally over the abdomen. An external rotation of at least 55° is necessary to allow the arm to be away from the body for adequate elbow flexion to perform most of the upper-limb activities of daily living.[26],[27] This range of external rotation and beyond were considered a good functional result. Data concerning the patients' age and gender, body mass index (BMI), the mechanism of injury, passive range of motion of the affected shoulder, and the injury-to-surgery interval were also collected from medical files.

Operative procedure

A 10-cm transverse incision was made, 1 cm above and parallel to the clavicle, extending laterally from the posterior border of the sternocleidomastoid to the acromioclavicular joint. Division of the platysma allowed supraclavicular nerve identification and preservation. Sometimes, when the insertion of the trapezius in the clavicle extends too medially, it can be detached, retracted posteriorly, and reinserted at the end of the surgery. The spinal accessory nerve could be identified just deep to the superolateral margin of the trapezius muscle near the clavicle with the transverse cervical artery and vein as landmarks. A nerve stimulator could be helpful in this dissection and should be used to confirm that the nerve is functional. The proximal branches to the upper part of the trapezius were preserved to avoid massive denervation of the trapezius muscle, whereas the terminal branch of the nerve was dissected and divided as far distally as possible, near to its entrance in the muscle, after the origin of 1 or 2 branches for the lowest part of the muscle. The muscle was reflected proximally. Next, the suprascapular nerve was identified arising from the superolateral aspect of the upper trunk, that is often involved in the upper trunk neuroma. It was transected in a healthy area at a point as close as possible to its division from the upper trunk. Eventually, this nerve can be displaced further distally to a retroclavicular or infraclavicular level owing to the downward shifting of the avulsed C5 and C6 roots. The dissection and mobilization of both the nerves permitted a tension-free coaptation, under the operating microscope in the supraclavicular fossa, with epineural sutures using 10-0 monofilament nylon and fibrin glue.

Statistical analysis

For descriptive purposes, categorical variables were presented as absolute and relative frequencies. Quantitative variables were assessed for normality through the skewness and kurtosis values as well as distributional graphical methods. Age and injury-surgery interval had a normal distribution and were presented as means, but the ranges of motion (ROM) values were non-parametric and were presented as medians and quartiles. The ranges of motion related to abduction and external rotation were compared via the Mann-Whitney U test. The percentages of patients with a favorable outcome (defined as the abduction ROM ≥30 degrees and the external rotation ROM ≥55 degrees) were compared by the chi-square test. All tests were two-tailed and P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were conducted using the software Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS Statistics, Version 24.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.).


 » Results Top


The sample characteristics of the study are summarized in [Table 1].
Table 1: Study sample characteristics - Adult patients with upper (C5, C6) and complete (C5-T1) brachial plexus palsies

Click here to view


Spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer was performed in 76 patients who met the study's inclusion criteria: 23 (30.2%) cases of upper-plexus injuries (C5, C6) and 53 (69.7%) cases of complete brachial plexus palsy (C5-T1). The results are summarized in [Table 2].
Table 2: Results of isolated spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer in adult patients with upper (C5, C6) and complete (C5-T1) brachial plexus palsies

Click here to view


The average age of patients with upper plexus palsy was 24.6 ± 8.4 years. A good shoulder abduction was achieved in 15 (65.2%) patients and a good external rotation in 5 (21.7%) patients in this group. In those patients with a good recovery, the average range of motion (ROM) was 53° (range 30-90°) for shoulder abduction and 71.2° (range 55-90°) for external rotation. Two patients who achieved a good result in their abduction movement and 3 who did not, had a body mass index (BMI) above 30. In relation to the external shoulder rotation, the result was bad in all the 5 patients.

Patients with complete palsy had an average age of 26.2 ± 8.9 years. Thirty-six patients (67.9%) in this group had a good recovery of their shoulder abduction with an average ROM of 30.7° (range 30-89°), but only 3 patients (5.6%) recovered a good shoulder external rotation with an average ROM of 68.3° (range 60-80°). The BMI was equal or greater than 30 in 2 patients with complete palsy and both had a good result for shoulder abduction and a bad recovery of their external rotation.

There was no difference in the outcome of abduction between the two groups. The median ROM for abduction was 30 (20-48) degrees for the upper plexus injury group and 35 (8 – 48) degrees for complete plexus palsy group (P = 0,737). The percentage of patients who achieved a ROM ≥30° was 60 (9%) and 67 (9%) (P = 0,551), respectively, in the two groups. The external rotation outcome was better in the upper plexus palsy group, who had a median ROM of 0 (range: 0-52) degrees (vs 0 [range: 0-0] degrees, P = 0,004) and 21 (7%) patients achieved a ROM ≥55° (vs 6, 0%, P = 0,099).

More than half of our patients (64.7%) were operated upon beyond six months post injury. The average interval between injury and surgery among patients with a good functional result was 6.8 ± 2.8 months, versus 8.0 ± 3.4 months among those with a poor outcome. When we compared partial and complete lesions, we found an interval from injury/surgery of 6.7 ± 2.8 versus 7.2 ± 3.1 months among those with a good outcome, and 8.1 ± 3.4 versus 7.7 ± 3.2 among those with a poor outcome. None of these differences were statistically significant.

When we divided our patients into those less than versus equal to or greater than 40 years old, we observed that 68.9% of patients under 40 years of age recovered a good abduction, while 16.4% achieved a good external rotation. Among patients 40 years and older, the corresponding percentages were 41.0% and 5.8%.


 » Discussion Top


The spinal accessory nerve is frequently used as a donor of axons during nerve transfers. Despite the wide variation of results, its transfer to the suprascapular nerve is considered the “gold standard” for restoring shoulder abduction and external rotation.

The supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and deltoid muscles are involved in glenohumeral motion, whereas the trapezius, levator scapulae, rhomboid, and serratus anterior muscles control the scapular thoracic motion.[28] Although subject to criticism, the reported angles of arm abduction by most authors, including us, is a combination of both the movements. Malessy et al.,[12] in a more critical analysis, considered only the active glenohumeral shoulder function and observed a poor suprascapular neurotization with the SASNT.

The reinnervation of the suprascapular nerve by a SASNT offers a good chance of restoring shoulder stability in many patients, producing adequate shoulder abduction and, in some patients, even restoring some degree of external rotation.[29],[30],[31] Considering shoulder abduction, the percentage of patients achieving a good result in the literature averages 66.4%, which compares favorably with the 67.1% we achieved across the two treatment groups in our series. There was no significant difference between the results for shoulder abduction in the two treatment groups. The restoration of external rotation with SASNT is usually inferior to that of shoulder abduction.[19],[29],[32],[33],[34] The potential reasons for this include: (1) the difference in the number of myelinated fibers from the donor (accessory nerve – 1700 fibers)[22] to the receptor (suprascapular nerve – 3800 fibers)[35] nerve; (2) the potential for the presence of two-levels of lesions; as we usually do not dissect the nerve distally, any injury affecting the suprascapular nerve after its branch to the supraspinatus, consequent to a scapular fracture,[19],[20] for example, had the potential to be overlooked; and, (3) more intense reinnervation of the first muscle reinnervated, the supraspinatus.[4],[20] The recovery of external rotation in our series was considerably lower than that reported in the literature (10.5% versus 37.4%). There are three possible explanations for this: (1) The large number of patients with complete lesions (70%) in our series; (2) many series considered any recovered ROM (less than 55°) as a good result; and,(3) some undetectable technical problem might have occurred during the procedure.

Preservation of the long thoracic nerve in partial lesions assures the presence of scapular thoracic motion and scapular stabilization during active shoulder abduction and should be considered essential for abduction recovery after a nerve transfer.[20],[25],[36] According to some authors, that is the reason why SASNT yields better results with upper-type versus total plexus palsies.[3] However, as noted previously,[7] the range of abduction recovered with complete lesions, and consequently with palsy of the serratus anterior muscle, was not affected. These results were very similar to the results in upper-plexus palsies – 65.2% and in complete lesions (67.9%).

Many authors[19],[20],[37],[38],[39] have emphasized that the simultaneous neurotization of suprascapular and axillary nerves optimizes outcomes related to shoulder abduction. As we wanted to assess the results of isolated SASNT, only the cases of upper plexus palsy operated before the widespread acceptance of the Somsak's procedure[11] were included in the study.

Body mass index (BMI) is defined as the individual's body mass divided by the square of their height, and is strongly correlated with the weight of the extremities. Therefore, it can be used to study the relationship between the upper extremity weight and the results of brachial plexus surgery. Studying 18 patients submitted to spinal accessory-to-suprascapular nerve transfer, Socolovsky et al.,[15] concluded that a high BMI is a negative predictor of outcome. Although only 7 patients (9.2%) in our series had a BMI equal or greater than 30, our results partially support their conclusion. Some patients (n = 4) had a functional recovery of shoulder abduction, but all had a bad shoulder external rotation recovery.

For brachial plexus surgeries, poor results are usually associated with a delay between the initial injury and surgery. The results are also inversely proportional to the age of the patient. In our study, comparing outcomes between patients operated upon within, versus beyond six months post injury, revealed no statistically significant difference in the outcome, while patients younger than 40 years old had a trend towards better results.


 » Conclusion Top


According to our results, spinal accessory-to-suprascapular nerve transfer is quite consistent as a procedure to achieve functional recovery of shoulder abduction after a partial or complete plexus injury, with both situations having very similar results. However, the outcome of external rotation was quite disappointing, with the percentage of good results being unacceptably low across our treatment groups. It behooves surgeons to keep searching for new techniques to improve this crucial outcome.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
 » References Top

1.
Allieu Y, Cenac P. Neurotization via the spinal accessory nerve in complete paralysis due to multiple avulsion injuries of the brachial plexus. Clin Orthop 1988;237:67-74.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Baltzer HL, Wagner ER, Kircher MF, Spinner RJ, Bishop AT, Shin AY. Evaluation of infraspinatus reinnervation and function following spinal accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve transfer in adult traumatic brachial plexus injuries. Microsurgery 2017;37:365-70.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Bertelli JA, Ghizoni MF. Transfer of the accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve in brachial plexus reconstruction.J Hand Surg Am 2007;32:989-98.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Bertelli JA, Ghizoni MF. Results of spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer in 110 patients with complete palsy of the brachial palsy. J Neurosurg Spine 2016;24:990-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Bhandari PS, Sadhotra LP, Bhargava P, Bath AS, Mukherjee MK, Bhatti T, et al. Surgical outcomes following nerve transfers in upper brachial plexus injuries. Indian J Plast Surg 2009;42:150-60.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
6.
Bhatia A, Shyam AK, Doshi P, Shah V. Nerve reconstruction: A cohort study of 93 cases of global brachial plexus palsy. Indian J Orthop 2011;45:153-60.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
7.
Birch R. Surgical Disorders of the Peripheral Nerves, 2nd ed, London: Springer, 2011.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Emamhadi M, Alijani B, Andalib S. Long-term clinical outcomes of spinal accessory nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve in patients with brachial plexus palsy. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2016;158:1801-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Estrella EP. Functional outcome of nerve transfers for upper-type brachial plexus injuries. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2011;64:1007-13.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Kostas-Agnantis I, Korompilias A, Vekris M, Lykissas M, Gkiatas I, Mitsionis G, et al. Shoulder abduction and external rotation restoration with nerve transfer. Injury 2013;44:299-304.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Leechavengvongs S, Witoonchart K, Uerpairojkit C, Thuvasethakul P, Malungpaishrope K. Combined nerve transfers for C5 and C6 brachial plexus avulsion injury. J Hand Surg Am 2006;31:183-9.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Malessy MJ, de Ruiter GC, de Boer KS, Thomeer RT. Evaluation of suprascapular nerve neurotization after nerve graft or transfer in the treatment of brachial plexus traction lesions. J Neurosurg 2004;101:377-89.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Merrell GA, Barrie KA, Katz DL, Wolfe SW. Results of nerve transfer techniques for restoration of shoulder and elbow function in the context of a meta-analysis of the English literature. J Hand Surg Am 2001;26:303-14.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Narakas AO, Hentz VR. Neurotization in brachial plexus injuries. Indications and results. Clin Orthop 1988;237:43-56.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Socolovsky M, Di Masi G, Bonilla G, Malessy M. Spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer in traumatic brachial plexus palsy: Is body mass index a predictor of outcome? Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014 156:159-63.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Souza FH, Bernardino SN, Filho HC, Gobbato PL, Martins RS, Martins HA, et al. Comparison between the anterior and posterior approach for transfer of the spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve in late traumatic brachial plexus injuries. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2014;156:2345-9.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Sulaiman OA, Kim DD, Burkett C, Kline DG. Nerve transfer surgery for adult brachial plexus injury: A 10-year experience at Louisiana State University. Neurosurgery 2009;65:A55-A62.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Suzuki K, Doi K, Hattori Y, Pagsaligan JM. Long-term results of spinal accessory nerve transfer to the suprascapular nerve in upper-type paralysis of brachial plexus injury. J Reconstr Microsurg 2007;23:295-300.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Terzis JK, Kostas I. Suprascapular nerve reconstruction in 118 cases of adult posttraumatic brachial plexus. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;117:613-29.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Vekris MD, Beris AE, Pafilas D, Lykissas MG, Xenakis TA, Soucacos PN. Shoulder reanimation in posttraumatic brachial plexus paralysis. Injury 2010;41:312-18.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Venkatramani H, Bhardwaj P, Faruquee SR, Sabapathy SR. Functional outcome of nerve transfer for restoration of shoulder and elbow function in upper brachial plexus injury. J Brachial Plex Peripher Nerve Inj 2008;3:15.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Bonnel F, Allieu Y, Sugata Y, Rabischong P. Bases anatomo-chirurgicales des neurotisations pour avulsions radiculaires du plexus brachial. Anat Clin 1979;1:291-6.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Bertelli JA, Ghizoni MF. Combined injury of the accessory nerve and brachial plexus. Neurosurgery 2011;68:390-6.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Millesi H. Surgical treatment of post-traumatic brachial plexus lesions. Eur Surg 2003;35:191-5.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Narakas AO (1995) Brachial plexus lesions. In: Leung PC, Gu YD, Ikuta Y, Narakas A, Landi A, Weiland AJ, editors. Microsurgery In Orthopaedic Practice. Singapore: World Scientific;1995. pp. 188-254.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Gates DH, Walters LS, Cowley J, Wilken JM, Resnik L. Range of motion requirements for upper-limb activities of daily living. Am J Occup Ther 2016;70:7001350010 p1- 10  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Raiss P, Rettig O, Wolf S, Loew M, Kasten P. Range of motion of shoulder and elbow in activities of daily life in 3D motion analysis. Z Orthop Unfall 2007;145:493-8.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Radin EL. Biomechanics and functional anatomy. In: Post M, editor. The Shoulder. Surgical And Nonsurgical Management. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger;1988. pp 54-60.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Chuang DC, Lee GW, Hashem F, Wei FC. Restoration of shoulder abduction by nerve transfer in avulsed brachial plexus injury: Evaluation of 99 patients with various nerve transfers. Plast Reconstr Surg 1995;96:122-8.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Narakas AO (1991) Neurotization in the treatment of brachial plexus injuries. In: Gelberman RH, editor. Operative Nerve repair and Reconstruction. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1991. pp.1329-58.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Songcharoen P. Neurotization in the treatment of brachial plexus injuries. In: Omer Jr GE, Spinner M, Van Beek LA, editors. Management of Peripheral Nerve Problems. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1998. pp 459-64.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Alnot JY. Traumatic brachial plexus lesions in the adult: Indications and results. Microsurgery 1995;16:22-29.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Bertelli JA, Ghizoni MF. Reconstruction of C5 and C6 brachial plexus avulsion injury by multiple nerve transfers: Spinal accessory to suprascapular, ulnar fascicles to biceps branch, and triceps long or lateral head branch to axillary nerve. J Hand Surg Am 2004;29:131-39.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Mikami Y, Nagano A, Ochiai N, Yamamoto S. Results of nerve grafting for injuries of the axillary and suprascapular nerves. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997;79:527-31.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Vathana T, Larsen M, de Ruiter GC, Bishop AT, Spinner RJ, Shin AY. An anatomic study of the spinal accessory nerve: extended harvest permits direct nerve transfer to distal plexus targets. Clin Anat 2007;20:899-904.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Terzis JK, Papakonstantinou KC. The surgical treatment of brachial plexus injuries in adults. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;106:1097-1122.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Chu B, Wang H, Chen L, Gu Y, Hu S. Dual nerve transfers for restoration of shoulder function after brachial plexus avulsion injury. Ann Plast Surg 2016;76:668-73.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Garg R, Merrell GA, Hillstrom HJ, Wolfe SW. Comparison of nerve transfers and nerve grafting for traumatic upper plexus palsy: A systematic review and analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:819-29.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Rinker B. Nerve transfers in the upper extremity – A practical user's guide. Ann Plast Surg 2015;74: S222-S228.  Back to cited text no. 39
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
   
Online since 20th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow