Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review

IntroductionBrachial plexus birth injury (BPBI) has an incidence of 0.9 per 1,000 live births in the population. Techniques for repair classically include supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting (SENG) and more recently nerve transfer, namely of the spinal accessory nerve (SAN) to the suprasc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dhruv Mendiratta, Rohan Singh, George Abdelmalek, Krittika Pant, Alice Chu, Aleksandra McGrath
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2024-12-01
Series:Frontiers in Pediatrics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2024.1426105/full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846116409804849152
author Dhruv Mendiratta
Rohan Singh
George Abdelmalek
Krittika Pant
Alice Chu
Aleksandra McGrath
Aleksandra McGrath
author_facet Dhruv Mendiratta
Rohan Singh
George Abdelmalek
Krittika Pant
Alice Chu
Aleksandra McGrath
Aleksandra McGrath
author_sort Dhruv Mendiratta
collection DOAJ
description IntroductionBrachial plexus birth injury (BPBI) has an incidence of 0.9 per 1,000 live births in the population. Techniques for repair classically include supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting (SENG) and more recently nerve transfer, namely of the spinal accessory nerve (SAN) to the suprascapular nerve (SSN) to improve functional outcomes such as glenohumeral abduction and external rotation. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate whether spinal accessory nerve transfer produced significantly better outcomes for shoulder abduction in BPBI.MethodsA search was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Individual Patient Data guidelines. Standardized comparisons were made using the Mallet Score for shoulder abduction.Results10 full-text articles with itemized patient outcome measures were selected. 110 patients were identified with 51 patients in the SENG group and 59 patients in the SAN transfer group. The mean shoulder abduction Mallet score in the SENG group was 3.50 ± 0.84, while the mean Mallet score in the SAN transfer group was 3.58 ± 0.77, which displayed no significant differences (p = 0.9012). There was no significant relationship between the age at time of surgery and post-operative Mallet scores for shoulder abduction after SENG (p = 0.3720).DiscussionOur systematic review found that there was no difference observed in post-operative outcomes of shoulder abduction when comparing SAN transfer and nerve grafting. Continued support for nerve grafting lies in the argument that it incorporates the patient's native neuroanatomy and allows for sensory reinnervation.
format Article
id doaj-art-ac65f9f7f20c4670ad5cb171c2193e70
institution Kabale University
issn 2296-2360
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Pediatrics
spelling doaj-art-ac65f9f7f20c4670ad5cb171c2193e702024-12-19T04:21:31ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Pediatrics2296-23602024-12-011210.3389/fped.2024.14261051426105Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic reviewDhruv Mendiratta0Rohan Singh1George Abdelmalek2Krittika Pant3Alice Chu4Aleksandra McGrath5Aleksandra McGrath6Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United StatesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United StatesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United StatesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United StatesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, United StatesDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, SwedenDepartment of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, SwedenIntroductionBrachial plexus birth injury (BPBI) has an incidence of 0.9 per 1,000 live births in the population. Techniques for repair classically include supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting (SENG) and more recently nerve transfer, namely of the spinal accessory nerve (SAN) to the suprascapular nerve (SSN) to improve functional outcomes such as glenohumeral abduction and external rotation. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate whether spinal accessory nerve transfer produced significantly better outcomes for shoulder abduction in BPBI.MethodsA search was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Individual Patient Data guidelines. Standardized comparisons were made using the Mallet Score for shoulder abduction.Results10 full-text articles with itemized patient outcome measures were selected. 110 patients were identified with 51 patients in the SENG group and 59 patients in the SAN transfer group. The mean shoulder abduction Mallet score in the SENG group was 3.50 ± 0.84, while the mean Mallet score in the SAN transfer group was 3.58 ± 0.77, which displayed no significant differences (p = 0.9012). There was no significant relationship between the age at time of surgery and post-operative Mallet scores for shoulder abduction after SENG (p = 0.3720).DiscussionOur systematic review found that there was no difference observed in post-operative outcomes of shoulder abduction when comparing SAN transfer and nerve grafting. Continued support for nerve grafting lies in the argument that it incorporates the patient's native neuroanatomy and allows for sensory reinnervation.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2024.1426105/fullbrachial plexus birth injuryperipheral nervesurgeryoutcomenerve graftnerve transfer
spellingShingle Dhruv Mendiratta
Rohan Singh
George Abdelmalek
Krittika Pant
Alice Chu
Aleksandra McGrath
Aleksandra McGrath
Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
Frontiers in Pediatrics
brachial plexus birth injury
peripheral nerve
surgery
outcome
nerve graft
nerve transfer
title Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
title_full Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
title_fullStr Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
title_short Spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury: a systematic review
title_sort spinal accessory nerve transfer for shoulder abduction has no benefit over supraclavicular exploration and nerve grafting in brachial plexus birth injury a systematic review
topic brachial plexus birth injury
peripheral nerve
surgery
outcome
nerve graft
nerve transfer
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fped.2024.1426105/full
work_keys_str_mv AT dhruvmendiratta spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT rohansingh spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT georgeabdelmalek spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT krittikapant spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT alicechu spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT aleksandramcgrath spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview
AT aleksandramcgrath spinalaccessorynervetransferforshoulderabductionhasnobenefitoversupraclavicularexplorationandnervegraftinginbrachialplexusbirthinjuryasystematicreview