ReviewJPRAS open2026
Surgical nerve wrapping for brachial plexus neuropathy: A systematic review.
Review in JPRAS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Brachial Plexus Wrapping by Free Perforator Fat Flap for Treatment of Recurrent Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nerve wrapping provides protection, reduces adhesions, and supports regeneration, with proven benefits in median and ulnar neuropathies. Brachial plexus neuropathies-arising from neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (NTOS), radiation-induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP), or trauma-pose distinct challenges, and indications for wrapping remain poorly defined. We conducted a systematic review of brachial plexus wrapping techniques to clarify approaches and outcomes. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest were searched following PRISMA guidelines; the protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Risk of bias was assessed with the MINORS tool. Extracted data included patient characteristics, surgical techniques, functional outcomes, complications, and recurrences. Results: Seventeen studies involving 645 patients (mean age 43.8 years; M/F 1/3.92) were included. The main indications were NTOS (77.1 %) and RIBP (22.6 %). Eleven wrapping techniques were identified: eight different flaps ( Conclusion: Brachial plexus wrapping may improve pain and function in selected patients, but current evidence is heterogeneous, retrospective, and at high risk of bias. Standardized, prospective controlled studies are required to determine its role relative to isolated neurolysis.Level of evidence: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.