Kanchai Malungpaishrope, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs, Joyce Tie
{"title":"不完全臂丛出生损伤的神经移植和神经转移:系统综述。","authors":"Kanchai Malungpaishrope, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs, Joyce Tie","doi":"10.1142/S2424835525500596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Primary neuroma excision and autografting are the gold-standard surgical treatments for brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI). With the rising popularity of distal nerve transfers, it is more frequently utilised to manage BPBI. However, distal transfers for BPBI remain under investigation. We reviewed the updated evidence for nerve transfers compared to nerve grafting as a primary approach for shoulder and elbow reconstruction in Narakas I and II neonatal brachial plexus palsy. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched using the search terms: ([{brachial plexus} AND {neonatal OR obstetric}] AND [graft OR grafting]) AND (transfer OR transfers). <b>Results:</b> Most studies did not specify the indications for grafting versus nerve transfer. Some suggested indications for nerve transfer surgery in BPBI include late presentations and nerve root avulsions. There was significantly greater improvement in shoulder external rotation postoperatively in the nerve transfer group compared to the nerve grafting group. There was no significant difference between the nerve transfer and nerve grafting groups for shoulder flexion, abduction and total active movement scale score. Patients undergoing nerve grafting were more likely to undergo a secondary shoulder stabilising procedure, though this was not statistically significant. <b>Conclusion:</b> The current literature shows that there appears to be little difference in functional outcomes between nerve grafting and nerve transfers. <b>Level of Evidence:</b> Level III (Therapeutic).</p>","PeriodicalId":51689,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery-Asian-Pacific Volume","volume":" ","pages":"399-407"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nerve Grafting and Nerve Transfer in Incomplete Brachial Plexus Birth Injury: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Kanchai Malungpaishrope, Piyabuth Kittithamvongs, Joyce Tie\",\"doi\":\"10.1142/S2424835525500596\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Primary neuroma excision and autografting are the gold-standard surgical treatments for brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI). With the rising popularity of distal nerve transfers, it is more frequently utilised to manage BPBI. However, distal transfers for BPBI remain under investigation. We reviewed the updated evidence for nerve transfers compared to nerve grafting as a primary approach for shoulder and elbow reconstruction in Narakas I and II neonatal brachial plexus palsy. <b>Methods:</b> A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched using the search terms: ([{brachial plexus} AND {neonatal OR obstetric}] AND [graft OR grafting]) AND (transfer OR transfers). <b>Results:</b> Most studies did not specify the indications for grafting versus nerve transfer. Some suggested indications for nerve transfer surgery in BPBI include late presentations and nerve root avulsions. There was significantly greater improvement in shoulder external rotation postoperatively in the nerve transfer group compared to the nerve grafting group. There was no significant difference between the nerve transfer and nerve grafting groups for shoulder flexion, abduction and total active movement scale score. Patients undergoing nerve grafting were more likely to undergo a secondary shoulder stabilising procedure, though this was not statistically significant. <b>Conclusion:</b> The current literature shows that there appears to be little difference in functional outcomes between nerve grafting and nerve transfers. <b>Level of Evidence:</b> Level III (Therapeutic).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hand Surgery-Asian-Pacific Volume\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"399-407\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hand Surgery-Asian-Pacific Volume\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424835525500596\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery-Asian-Pacific Volume","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424835525500596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:原发性神经瘤切除和自体移植是臂丛先天性损伤(BPBI)的金标准手术治疗方法。随着远端神经转移的日益普及,它更常用于治疗BPBI。然而,BPBI的远端转移仍在研究中。我们回顾了神经移植与神经移植作为Narakas I型和II型新生儿臂丛神经麻痹肩肘重建的主要方法的最新证据。方法:根据PRISMA指南对相关文献进行系统回顾。检索PubMed和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库,检索词为:([{brachial plexus} and {neonatal OR产科}]and [graft OR graft])和(transfer OR transfers)。结果:大多数研究没有明确移植与神经移植的适应症。一些建议的BPBI神经转移手术指征包括晚期发病和神经根撕脱。与神经移植组相比,神经移植组术后肩关节外旋改善明显。神经移植组与神经移植组肩关节屈曲、外展及总主动运动量表评分差异无统计学意义。接受神经移植的患者更有可能接受二次肩部稳定手术,尽管这没有统计学意义。结论:目前的文献显示,神经移植和神经转移在功能结局上几乎没有区别。证据等级:III级(治疗性)。
Nerve Grafting and Nerve Transfer in Incomplete Brachial Plexus Birth Injury: A Systematic Review.
Background: Primary neuroma excision and autografting are the gold-standard surgical treatments for brachial plexus birth injury (BPBI). With the rising popularity of distal nerve transfers, it is more frequently utilised to manage BPBI. However, distal transfers for BPBI remain under investigation. We reviewed the updated evidence for nerve transfers compared to nerve grafting as a primary approach for shoulder and elbow reconstruction in Narakas I and II neonatal brachial plexus palsy. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched using the search terms: ([{brachial plexus} AND {neonatal OR obstetric}] AND [graft OR grafting]) AND (transfer OR transfers). Results: Most studies did not specify the indications for grafting versus nerve transfer. Some suggested indications for nerve transfer surgery in BPBI include late presentations and nerve root avulsions. There was significantly greater improvement in shoulder external rotation postoperatively in the nerve transfer group compared to the nerve grafting group. There was no significant difference between the nerve transfer and nerve grafting groups for shoulder flexion, abduction and total active movement scale score. Patients undergoing nerve grafting were more likely to undergo a secondary shoulder stabilising procedure, though this was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The current literature shows that there appears to be little difference in functional outcomes between nerve grafting and nerve transfers. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).