-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Is there any difference between anterior and posterior approach for the spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer? A systematic review and meta-analysis
M. Makel, A. Sukop, D. Kachlík, P. Waldauf, A. Whitley, R. Kaiser
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu metaanalýza, systematický přehled, časopisecké články
- MeSH
- kognice MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nervový transfer * MeSH
- nervus radialis MeSH
- rameno * chirurgie MeSH
- regenerace nervu MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- metaanalýza MeSH
- systematický přehled MeSH
Dual nerve transfer of the spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve (SAN-SSN) and the radial nerve to the axillary nerve is considered to be the most feasible method of restoration of shoulder abduction in brachial plexus injuries. Supraspinatus muscle plays an important role in the initiation of abduction and its functional restoration is crucial for shoulder movements. There are two possible approaches for the SAN-SSN transfer: the more conventional anterior approach and the posterior approach in the area of scapular spine, which allows more distal neurotization. Although the dual nerve transfer is a widely used method, it is unclear which approach for the SAN-SSN transfer results in better outcomes. We conducted a search of English literature from January 2001 to December 2021 using the PRISMA guidelines. Twelve studies with a total 142 patients met our inclusion criteria. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the approach used: Group A included patients who underwent the anterior approach, and Group B included patients who underwent the posterior approach. Abduction strength using the Medical Research Scale (MRC) and range of motion (ROM) were assessed. The average MRC grade was 3.57 ± 1.08 in Group A and 4.0 ± 0.65 (p = 0.65) in Group B. The average ROM was 114.6 ± 36.7 degrees in Group A and 103.4 ± 37.2 degrees in Group B (p = 0.247). In conclusion, we did not find statistically significant differences between SAN-SSN transfers performed from the anterior or posterior approach in patients undergoing dual neurotization technique for restoration of shoulder abduction.
Department of Anatomy 1st Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Department of Anatomy 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc23011641
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20230801133222.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 230718s2023 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1080/01616412.2022.2156721 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)36526442
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Makel, Michal $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Královské Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Anatomy, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000209895352
- 245 10
- $a Is there any difference between anterior and posterior approach for the spinal accessory to suprascapular nerve transfer? A systematic review and meta-analysis / $c M. Makel, A. Sukop, D. Kachlík, P. Waldauf, A. Whitley, R. Kaiser
- 520 9_
- $a Dual nerve transfer of the spinal accessory nerve to the suprascapular nerve (SAN-SSN) and the radial nerve to the axillary nerve is considered to be the most feasible method of restoration of shoulder abduction in brachial plexus injuries. Supraspinatus muscle plays an important role in the initiation of abduction and its functional restoration is crucial for shoulder movements. There are two possible approaches for the SAN-SSN transfer: the more conventional anterior approach and the posterior approach in the area of scapular spine, which allows more distal neurotization. Although the dual nerve transfer is a widely used method, it is unclear which approach for the SAN-SSN transfer results in better outcomes. We conducted a search of English literature from January 2001 to December 2021 using the PRISMA guidelines. Twelve studies with a total 142 patients met our inclusion criteria. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the approach used: Group A included patients who underwent the anterior approach, and Group B included patients who underwent the posterior approach. Abduction strength using the Medical Research Scale (MRC) and range of motion (ROM) were assessed. The average MRC grade was 3.57 ± 1.08 in Group A and 4.0 ± 0.65 (p = 0.65) in Group B. The average ROM was 114.6 ± 36.7 degrees in Group A and 103.4 ± 37.2 degrees in Group B (p = 0.247). In conclusion, we did not find statistically significant differences between SAN-SSN transfers performed from the anterior or posterior approach in patients undergoing dual neurotization technique for restoration of shoulder abduction.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a rameno $x chirurgie $7 D012782
- 650 12
- $a nervový transfer $7 D016067
- 650 _2
- $a nervus radialis $7 D011826
- 650 _2
- $a regenerace nervu $7 D009416
- 650 _2
- $a kognice $7 D003071
- 655 _2
- $a metaanalýza $7 D017418
- 655 _2
- $a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Sukop, Andrej $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Královské Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000159245123
- 700 1_
- $a Kachlík, David $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000281509663 $7 pna2008482481
- 700 1_
- $a Waldauf, Petr $u Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000346685837 $7 xx0085547
- 700 1_
- $a Whitley, Adam $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of General Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and University Hospital Královské Vinohrady, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/000000024415172X
- 700 1_
- $a Kaiser, Radek $u Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital Prague, Prague Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000259859595
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008143 $t Neurological research $x 1743-1328 $g Roč. 45, č. 5 (2023), s. 489-496
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36526442 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20230718 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20230801133218 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1963841 $s 1197906
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2023 $b 45 $c 5 $d 489-496 $e 20221216 $i 1743-1328 $m Neurological research $n Neurol Res $x MED00008143
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20230718
