Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28293499›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2016

Proximal versus Distal Nerve Transfer for Biceps Reinnervation-A Comparative Study in a Rat's Brachial Plexus Injury Model.

Aleksandra M McGrath, Johnny Chuieng-Yi Lu, Tommy Naj-Jen Chang, Frank Fang, David Chwei-Chin Chuang

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Aleksandra M McGrathDepartment of Hand and Plastic Surgery, Norrland's University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; and Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taipei-Linkou, Taiwan.
Johnny Chuieng-Yi LuDepartment of Hand and Plastic Surgery, Norrland's University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; and Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taipei-Linkou, Taiwan.
Tommy Naj-Jen ChangDepartment of Hand and Plastic Surgery, Norrland's University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; and Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taipei-Linkou, Taiwan.
Frank FangDepartment of Hand and Plastic Surgery, Norrland's University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; and Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taipei-Linkou, Taiwan.
David Chwei-Chin ChuangDepartment of Hand and Plastic Surgery, Norrland's University Hospital, Umeå, Sweden; Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; and Department of Plastic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taipei-Linkou, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe exact role of proximal and distal nerve transfers in reconstruction strategies of brachial plexus injury remains controversial. We compared proximal with distal nerve reconstruction strategies in a rat model of brachial plexus injury.

methodsIn rats, the C6 spinal nerve with a nerve graft (proximal nerve transfer model, n = 30, group A) and 50% of ulnar nerve (distal nerve transfer model, n = 30, group B) were used as the donor nerves. The targets were the musculocutaneous nerve and the biceps muscle. Outcomes were recorded at 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks postoperatively. Outcome parameters included grooming test, biceps muscle weight, compound muscle action potentials, tetanic contraction force, and axonal morphology of the donor and target nerves.

resultsThe axonal morphology of the 2 donor nerves revealed no significant difference. Time interval analysis in the proximal nerve transfer group showed peak axon counts at 12 weeks and a trend of improvement in all functional and physiologic parameters across all time points with statistically significant differences for grooming test, biceps compound action potentials, tetanic muscle contraction force, and muscle weight at 16 weeks. In contrast, in the distal nerve transfer group, the only statistically significant difference was observed between the 4 and 8 week time points, followed by a plateau from 8 to 16 weeks.

conclusionsOutcomes of proximal nerve transfers are ultimately superior to distal nerve transfers in our experimental model. Possible explanations for the superior results include a reduced need for cortical adaptation and higher proportions of motor units in the proximal nerve transfers.

Identifiers

PMID28293499
PMCPMC5222644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.