A comparison of functional outcomes for triceps motor branch transfer to the anterior division axillary nerve in upper trunk brachial plexus injuries versus non-brachial plexus axillary nerve injuries.

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Mikaela H Sullivan, Ava G Chappell, Robert J Spinner, Nicholas Pulos, Allen T Bishop, Alexander Y Shin
{"title":"A comparison of functional outcomes for triceps motor branch transfer to the anterior division axillary nerve in upper trunk brachial plexus injuries versus non-brachial plexus axillary nerve injuries.","authors":"Mikaela H Sullivan, Ava G Chappell, Robert J Spinner, Nicholas Pulos, Allen T Bishop, Alexander Y Shin","doi":"10.3171/2025.1.FOCUS24890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Triceps motor branch transfer to the anterior division of the axillary nerve (AXN) was originally described for patients with a loss of deltoid function secondary to upper trunk (UT) brachial plexus injuries but has evolved to restore deltoid function in isolated peripheral AXN injuries. The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes in patients who had undergone this procedure in the setting of UT brachial plexus injury versus peripheral AXN injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The records of patients who had undergone triceps branch to anterior division of the AXN transfer at a single academic institution between 2001 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included in the study if they had either a UT or an AXN injury and were excluded if their follow-up was less than 2 years. Pre- and postoperative outcomes, including modified British Medical Research Council grade and range of motion, were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-two patients met the criteria for inclusion. Thirty cases were classified as UT injury and 12 cases as AXN injury. The mean postoperative abduction strength was significantly higher in the AXN injury group (3.2 ± 1.5 vs 1.9 ± 1.2, p = 0.007), as was the postoperative change in abduction strength (2.8 ± 1.7 vs 1.6 ± 1.4, p = 0.01). The mean postoperative forward flexion (136° ± 57° vs 79° ± 54°, p = 0.005) and abduction (129° ± 64° vs 59° ± 47°, p = 0.004) were significantly better in the AXN group, although postoperative changes in flexion and abduction were not different between the groups. Triceps strength preoperatively was similar to that postoperatively in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patients with an AXN injury, compared to those with a UT injury, had better postoperative abduction strength and shoulder range of motion after triceps branch transfer to the anterior division of the AXN. Triceps strength was not significantly changed after the procedure in the two groups. The study findings suggest that the outcomes of triceps branch transfer to the anterior division of the AXN are different based on the location and type of injury, providing insight into prognosis while counseling patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":19187,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical focus","volume":"58 4","pages":"E5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical focus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2025.1.FOCUS24890","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Triceps motor branch transfer to the anterior division of the axillary nerve (AXN) was originally described for patients with a loss of deltoid function secondary to upper trunk (UT) brachial plexus injuries but has evolved to restore deltoid function in isolated peripheral AXN injuries. The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes in patients who had undergone this procedure in the setting of UT brachial plexus injury versus peripheral AXN injury.

Methods: The records of patients who had undergone triceps branch to anterior division of the AXN transfer at a single academic institution between 2001 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were included in the study if they had either a UT or an AXN injury and were excluded if their follow-up was less than 2 years. Pre- and postoperative outcomes, including modified British Medical Research Council grade and range of motion, were compared between the two groups.

Results: Forty-two patients met the criteria for inclusion. Thirty cases were classified as UT injury and 12 cases as AXN injury. The mean postoperative abduction strength was significantly higher in the AXN injury group (3.2 ± 1.5 vs 1.9 ± 1.2, p = 0.007), as was the postoperative change in abduction strength (2.8 ± 1.7 vs 1.6 ± 1.4, p = 0.01). The mean postoperative forward flexion (136° ± 57° vs 79° ± 54°, p = 0.005) and abduction (129° ± 64° vs 59° ± 47°, p = 0.004) were significantly better in the AXN group, although postoperative changes in flexion and abduction were not different between the groups. Triceps strength preoperatively was similar to that postoperatively in both groups.

Conclusions: Patients with an AXN injury, compared to those with a UT injury, had better postoperative abduction strength and shoulder range of motion after triceps branch transfer to the anterior division of the AXN. Triceps strength was not significantly changed after the procedure in the two groups. The study findings suggest that the outcomes of triceps branch transfer to the anterior division of the AXN are different based on the location and type of injury, providing insight into prognosis while counseling patients.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurosurgical focus
Neurosurgical focus CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
261
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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