Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40405933›Full record

ArticleJournal of medicine and life2025

Functional outcomes following nerve transfers for shoulder and elbow reanimation in brachial plexus injuries: a 10-year retrospective study.

Cristian-Vladimir Vancea, Florin-Vlad Hodea, Eliza-Maria Bordeanu-Diaconescu, Stefan Cacior, Catalina-Stefania Dumitru, Vladut-Alin Ratoiu, Alexandru Stoian, Ioan Lascar, Dragos Zamfirescu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

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

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Cristian-Vladimir VanceaDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Florin-Vlad HodeaDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Eliza-Maria Bordeanu-DiaconescuClinic of Plastic Surgery and Reconstructive Microsurgery, Clinical Emergency Hospital of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania.
Stefan CaciorDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Catalina-Stefania DumitruDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Vladut-Alin RatoiuDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Alexandru StoianClinic of Plastic Surgery and Reconstructive Microsurgery, Zetta Hospital, Bucharest, Romania.
Ioan LascarDepartment 11, Discipline of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania.
Dragos ZamfirescuClinic of Plastic Surgery and Reconstructive Microsurgery, Zetta Hospital, Bucharest, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brachial plexus injuries are rare but highly disabling, with major implications for upper limb function and quality of life. Nerve transfers have emerged as a key reconstructive technique, particularly valuable in cases where primary repair or grafting is unfeasible or delayed. This retrospective study analysed functional outcomes following nerve transfers in 37 patients with brachial plexus injury. Motor recovery was assessed using the Medical Research Council scale. Patients were stratified by age, timing of surgery, injury severity, and type of nerve transfer performed. The majority of our cohort consisted of male adults, predominantly injured in motorcycle accidents, while pediatric cases were mostly due to obstetrical trauma. For shoulder reanimation, all patients received spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer, with a subset also undergoing medial triceps branch of the radial nerve to axillary nerve transfer. These techniques resulted in 85.3% of patients achieving shoulder function recovery with M3 or M4 muscle strength, with combined procedures leading exclusively to M3 or M4 muscle strength. For elbow flexion restoration, surgical approaches included intercostal to musculocutaneous nerve transfer, ulnar and median fascicles to musculocutaneous nerve transfer, contralateral C7 to musculocutaneous nerve transfer with ulnar graft, and spinal accessory to musculocutaneous nerve transfer with sural nerve graft. Root grafting procedures using sural nerve grafts or nerve conduits were employed in three pediatric patients. Overall, 84.38% of patients achieved elbow flexion recovery with M3 or M4 muscle strength. These findings reinforce the utility of nerve transfers as a cornerstone in the surgical management of brachial plexus injury.

Indexed as

Brachial PlexusBrachial Plexus NeuropathiesElbowNerve TransferShoulderAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung Adultbrachial plexus palsynerve reconstructionnerve transfersshoulder/elbow function restoration

Identifiers

PMID40405933
PMCPMC12094303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.