Comparison between donor nerves to motorize the free functional gracilis muscle transfer for elbow flexion: Retrospective study of 38 consecutive cases in traumatic adult brachial plexus injuries

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorCHO, Alvaro B.
dc.contributor.authorSILVA, Gustavo Bersani
dc.contributor.authorPISANI, Marina J.
dc.contributor.authorALVES, Jairo A.
dc.contributor.authorIAMAGUCHI, Raquel B.
dc.contributor.authorWEI, Teng H.
dc.contributor.authorREZENDE, Marcelo R. de
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-20T14:54:17Z
dc.date.available2019-08-20T14:54:17Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractPurpose Elbow flexion deficit is a frequent problem in traumatic brachial plexus injuries and reestablishment of this function is the primary treatment goal. When management is delayed, or the initial acute approach fails, free functional transfer of the gracilis muscle for elbow flexion is the treatment of choice. In this report, the authors present the results of a comparison study on different donor nerves (spinal accessory and ulnar) in elbow flexion reconstruction with gracilis flap for traumatic adult brachial plexus injuries. Methods Retrospective analysis of patients with both total or partial traumatic brachial plexus injuries was carried out. Of the 38 patients enrolled, 37 were male (97.4%) with a mean age of 28.3 years. The mean follow-up period was 25 months. Postoperative function of the gracilis muscle flap was recorded and patients were divided into two groups according to donor nerve: spinal accessory nerve (SAN) (18 cases), and motor fascicles of the ulnar (ULNAR) (20 cases). Results Twenty-six cases obtained elbow flexion strength M3 or M4 (68.4%): 0 M0 (0.0%), 4 M1 (10.5%), 8 M2 (21.1%), 9 M3 (23.7%) and 17 M4 (44.7%). The mean interval to first recorded M3 muscular strength was 12.4 months. Functional elbow flexion strength (>= M3) had the following distribution: SAN 83.3% (15/18) and ULNAR 55.0% (11/20) (p = .086). Conclusion No statistical difference for final muscle strength was found between donor nerve groups.eng
dc.description.conferencedateSEP 29-OCT 01, 2016
dc.description.conferencelocalAustin, TX
dc.description.conferencename71st Annual Meeting of the American-Society-for-Surgery-of-the-Hand
dc.description.indexMEDLINEeng
dc.identifier.citationMICROSURGERY, v.39, n.5, p.400-404, 2019
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/micr.30426
dc.identifier.eissn1098-2752
dc.identifier.issn0738-1085
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/33310
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWILEYeng
dc.relation.ispartofMicrosurgery
dc.rightsrestrictedAccesseng
dc.rights.holderCopyright WILEYeng
dc.subject.otherulnar nerveeng
dc.subject.othertransplantationeng
dc.subject.otherrestorationeng
dc.subject.otheroutcomeseng
dc.subject.wosSurgeryeng
dc.titleComparison between donor nerves to motorize the free functional gracilis muscle transfer for elbow flexion: Retrospective study of 38 consecutive cases in traumatic adult brachial plexus injurieseng
dc.typearticleeng
dc.type.categoryarticle; proceedings papereng
dc.type.versionpublishedVersioneng
dspace.entity.typePublication
hcfmusp.author.externalPISANI, Marina J.:Univ Sao Paulo, Hand & Microsurg Unit, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Sao Paulo, Brazil
hcfmusp.author.externalALVES, Jairo A.:Univ Sao Paulo, Hand & Microsurg Unit, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Sao Paulo, Brazil
hcfmusp.citation.scopus12
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcALVARO BAIK CHO
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcGUSTAVO BERSANI SILVA
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcRAQUEL BERNARDELLI IAMAGUCHI DA COSTA
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcTENG HSIANG WEI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcMARCELO ROSA DE REZENDE
hcfmusp.description.beginpage400
hcfmusp.description.endpage404
hcfmusp.description.issue5
hcfmusp.description.volume39
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.pubmed30672009
hcfmusp.origem.scopus2-s2.0-85060520753
hcfmusp.origem.wosWOS:000475338300003
hcfmusp.publisher.cityHOBOKENeng
hcfmusp.publisher.countryUSAeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAnjos K. C., 2012, THESISeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAZZE RJ, 1994, MICROSURG, V15, P28, DOI 10.1002/micr.1920150109eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBarrie Kimberly A, 2004, Neurosurg Focus, V16, pE8eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBengtson KA, 2008, HAND CLIN, V24, P401, DOI 10.1016/j.hcl.2008.04.001eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBhardwaj P, 2009, J BRACHIAL PLEX PERI, V4, DOI 10.1186/1749-7221-4-3eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBishop AT, 2005, HAND CLIN, V21, P91, DOI 10.1016/j.hcl.2004.10.005eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceChim H, 2014, J HAND SURG-AM, V39, P1959, DOI 10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.06.020eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceChin K, 2013, J PLAST RECONSTR AES, V66, P144, DOI 10.1016/j.bjps.2012.07.016eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceChuang DCC, 1996, J HAND SURG-AM, V21A, P1071, DOI 10.1016/S0363-5023(96)80318-2eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCHUANG DCC, 1993, J HAND SURG-AM, V18A, P285, DOI 10.1016/0363-5023(93)90363-8eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceColbert SH, 2008, HAND CLIN, V24, P341, DOI 10.1016/j.hcl.2008.07.001eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCoulet B, 2011, ORTHOP TRAUMATOL-SUR, V97, P479, DOI [10.1016/j.otsr.2011.03.022, 10.1016/j.otsr.2011.07.012]eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDyck PJ, 2005, J PERIPHER NERV SYST, V10, P158, DOI 10.1111/j.1085-9489.2005.0010206.xeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFlores LP, 2006, ARQ NEURO-PSIQUIAT, V64, P88, DOI 10.1590/S0004-282X2006000100018eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGiuffre JL, 2012, J RECONSTR MICROSURG, V28, P349, DOI 10.1055/s-0032-1313767eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceGousheh J, 2010, J HAND SURG-EUR VOL, V35E, P16, DOI 10.1177/1753193409348182eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceIkuta Y, 1979, Ann Acad Med Singapore, V8, P454eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKay S, 2010, J PLAST RECONSTR AES, V63, P1142, DOI 10.1016/j.bjps.2009.05.021eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKimura Luiz Koiti, 2011, Rev. bras. ortop., V46, P534, DOI [10.1590/S0102-36162011000500009, 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30408-0]eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceKRAKAUER JD, 1994, J HAND SURG-AM, V19A, P829, DOI 10.1016/0363-5023(94)90196-1eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLin SH, 2004, J RECONSTR MICROSURG, V20, P227eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMANKTELOW RT, 1989, ANN PLAS SURG, V22, P275, DOI 10.1097/00000637-198904000-00001eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMedical Research Council, 1981, 45 MRCeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceNARAKAS AO, 1985, INT ORTHOP, V9, P29, DOI 10.1007/BF00267034eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceOberlin C, 2009, CHIR MAIN, V28, P1, DOI 10.1016/j.main.2008.11.010eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRocha J. R., 2004, REV INTO, V2, P11eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceStockinger T, 2008, J HAND SURG-AM, V33A, P1100, DOI 10.1016/j.jhsa.2008.03.010eng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSungpet A, 2003, ANZ J SURG, V73, P133, DOI 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02654.xeng
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTeboul F, 2004, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V86A, P1485, DOI 10.2106/00004623-200407000-00018eng
hcfmusp.scopus.lastupdate2024-06-09
relation.isAuthorOfPublication1a8f8487-b802-4071-aba9-fc220049e8aa
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationaf36d514-c959-451c-9126-febd2f727c73
relation.isAuthorOfPublication71cc8498-1998-42e3-86fc-e2d2ee56393b
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationb4db3f57-7475-4597-8775-504cfc94bf75
relation.isAuthorOfPublication6d61c446-e1f9-4c57-b64b-88671d3429c0
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery1a8f8487-b802-4071-aba9-fc220049e8aa
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Nome:
art_CHO_Comparison_between_donor_nerves_to_motorize_the_free_2019.PDF
Tamanho:
1.11 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
publishedVersion (English)
Baixar
Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/IOT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/41