Low-Velocity Ballistic Trauma-Related Upper Extremity Nerve Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Helene Retrouvey, Cecile Harmange, Moaath Saggaf, Kristen DeSanto, Fraser J Leversedge, Alexander Lauder
{"title":"Low-Velocity Ballistic Trauma-Related Upper Extremity Nerve Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Helene Retrouvey, Cecile Harmange, Moaath Saggaf, Kristen DeSanto, Fraser J Leversedge, Alexander Lauder","doi":"10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-00121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Optimal management of upper extremity nerve palsy caused by low-velocity ballistic trauma (LBT) remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the available evidence on the management of nerve injuries caused by LBT to the upper extremity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was completed for the keywords \"Upper extremity,\" \"Nerve Injury,\" and \"Ballistic.\" 2 independent reviewers conducted a systematic screening of all articles and collected data from relevant publications. The data were summarized and pooled using a random-effect model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>14 studies met inclusion criteria. Cohorts between 6 and 168 patients (n = 848) with upper extremity LBT were reported. Neurologic deficits were present in 45% (95% CI: 38 to 52%) of patients at the time of injury evaluation. Nerve exploration was done in 50% (95% CI: 27 to 73%) of these patients with neurologic deficits. Early nerve exploration was done in 19% (95% CI: 9 to 32%) of all patients. Surgical findings included nerve continuity (49%; 95% CI: 14 to 84%), nerve contusion (30%; 95% CI: 12 to 50%), and nerve transection (31%; 95% CI: 14 to 50%). Nerve transection rates found at the time of exploration ranged from 0 to 71% (mean 31%). Outcomes were good in 62% (95% CI: 41 to 81%); however, analyses were limited by subjective outcome reporting of the studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Contrary to historical teaching that LBT causes neurapraxia, this review identified that 31% of resulting nerve injuries were neurotmesis (transections). These results advocate for systematic clinical follow-up and appropriately timed nerve intervention (within 3 to 6 months of injury) when neurologic deficits persist after ballistic injury.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III.</p>","PeriodicalId":51098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-24-00121","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Optimal management of upper extremity nerve palsy caused by low-velocity ballistic trauma (LBT) remains controversial. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the available evidence on the management of nerve injuries caused by LBT to the upper extremity.

Methods: A literature search was completed for the keywords "Upper extremity," "Nerve Injury," and "Ballistic." 2 independent reviewers conducted a systematic screening of all articles and collected data from relevant publications. The data were summarized and pooled using a random-effect model.

Results: 14 studies met inclusion criteria. Cohorts between 6 and 168 patients (n = 848) with upper extremity LBT were reported. Neurologic deficits were present in 45% (95% CI: 38 to 52%) of patients at the time of injury evaluation. Nerve exploration was done in 50% (95% CI: 27 to 73%) of these patients with neurologic deficits. Early nerve exploration was done in 19% (95% CI: 9 to 32%) of all patients. Surgical findings included nerve continuity (49%; 95% CI: 14 to 84%), nerve contusion (30%; 95% CI: 12 to 50%), and nerve transection (31%; 95% CI: 14 to 50%). Nerve transection rates found at the time of exploration ranged from 0 to 71% (mean 31%). Outcomes were good in 62% (95% CI: 41 to 81%); however, analyses were limited by subjective outcome reporting of the studies.

Conclusions: Contrary to historical teaching that LBT causes neurapraxia, this review identified that 31% of resulting nerve injuries were neurotmesis (transections). These results advocate for systematic clinical follow-up and appropriately timed nerve intervention (within 3 to 6 months of injury) when neurologic deficits persist after ballistic injury.

Level of evidence: Level III.

低速弹道创伤导致的上肢神经损伤:系统回顾与元分析》。
目的:低速弹道创伤(LBT)导致的上肢神经麻痹的最佳治疗方法仍存在争议。本系统性综述旨在总结有关上肢低速弹道创伤导致神经损伤的现有治疗证据:以 "上肢"、"神经损伤 "和 "弹道 "为关键词进行文献检索。两名独立审稿人对所有文章进行了系统筛选,并从相关出版物中收集了数据。采用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总和汇总:14项研究符合纳入标准。报告了6至168例(n = 848)上肢LBT患者的队列。损伤评估时,45%(95% CI:38% 至 52%)的患者存在神经功能缺损。在这些出现神经功能缺损的患者中,50%(95% CI:27% 至 73%)的患者进行了神经探查。在所有患者中,19%(95% CI:9 至 32%)的患者进行了早期神经探查。手术结果包括神经连续性(49%;95% CI:14% 至 84%)、神经挫伤(30%;95% CI:12% 至 50%)和神经横断(31%;95% CI:14% 至 50%)。探查时发现的神经横断率从 0% 到 71%(平均 31%)不等。62%的研究结果良好(95% CI:41% 至 81%);然而,分析结果受到研究报告主观结果的限制:结论:与枸橼酸栓塞疗法会导致神经瘫痪的历史教导相反,本综述发现,31% 的神经损伤是神经瘫痪(横断)。这些结果表明,当弹道损伤后神经功能缺损持续存在时,应进行系统的临床随访并适时进行神经干预(损伤后 3 至 6 个月内):证据等级:三级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
529
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was established in the fall of 1993 by the Academy in response to its membership’s demand for a clinical review journal. Two issues were published the first year, followed by six issues yearly from 1994 through 2004. In September 2005, JAAOS began publishing monthly issues. Each issue includes richly illustrated peer-reviewed articles focused on clinical diagnosis and management. Special features in each issue provide commentary on developments in pharmacotherapeutics, materials and techniques, and computer applications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信