SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
A meta-analysis and systematic review: association of timing and muscle strength after nerve transfer in upper trunk palsy.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Liposomal bupivacaine versus ropivacaine in four-in-one nerve block for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Trial
- Does Age Predict Outcomes of Triceps to Axillary Nerve Transfer?Journal of hand surgery global online · 2027Article
- Primary intracranial extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma in a teenager with unusual frontal location and surgical complications: A case report and literature review.Oncology letters · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to address the PICO question: Does early (< 6 months) nerve transfer improve muscle strength outcomes when compared to late (≥ 6 months) nerve transfer for upper trunk palsy, as measured by the Medical Research Council (MRC) scale? The association between age and successful muscle function recovery was assessed as a secondary outcome. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. A total of 349 studies were screened, with 27 studies meeting criteria for systematic review, and 16 included in the meta-analysis. Most patients were young adult males who underwent a variety of different types of nerve transfers such as spinal accessory to suprascapular or triceps branch to axillary. Overall, 181 patients underwent nerve transfer within 6 months of injury, while 139 underwent nerve transfer after 6 months. Patients who underwent early nerve transfer had a 0.87 point higher postoperative MRC, compared to patients in the delayed period (p < 0.00001, n = 320), nearly a whole point difference in the MRC scale which is clinically significant and could make the difference between achieving functional muscle strength (MRC ≥ 3) or not. Additionally, patients who achieved functional postoperative muscle strength were 5.56 years younger than patients who did not (95% CI = [0.92, 10.20], n = 274). All included studies were of moderate quality according to MINORS, except one of poor quality. In conclusion, early nerve transfers for upper trunk palsy are associated with clinically and statistically significant improvements in muscle strength. When feasible, patients with persistent severe upper trunk palsy should undergo nerve transfer within 6 months post-injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40500550What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.