Crouch Dustin L, Li Zhongyu, Barnwell Jonathan C, Plate Johannes F, Daly Melissa, Saul Katherine R
Biomedical Engineering, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157, USA.
J Hand Surg Am. 2011 Oct;36(10):1644-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.07.019. Epub 2011 Sep 8.
Functional ability after nerve transfer for upper brachial plexus injuries relies on both the function and magnitude of force recovery of targeted muscles. Following nerve transfers targeting either the axillary nerve, suprascapular nerve, or both, it is unclear whether functional ability is restored in the face of limited muscle force recovery.
We used a computer model to simulate flexing the elbow while maintaining a functional shoulder posture for 3 nerve transfer scenarios. We assessed the minimum restored force capacity necessary to perform the task, the associated compensations by neighboring muscles, and the effect of altered muscle coordination on movement effort.
The minimum force restored by the axillary, suprascapular, and combined nerve transfers that was required for the model to simulate the desired movement was 25%, 40%, and 15% of the unimpaired muscle force capacity, respectively. When the deltoid was paralyzed, the infraspinatus and subscapularis muscles generated higher shoulder abduction moments to compensate for deltoid weakness. For all scenarios, movement effort increased as restored force capacity decreased.
Combined axillary and suprascapular nerve transfer required the least restored force capacity to perform the desired elbow flexion task, whereas single suprascapular nerve transfer required the most restored force capacity to perform the same task. Although compensation mechanisms allowed all scenarios to perform the desired movement despite weakened shoulder muscles, compensation increased movement effort. Dynamic simulations allowed independent evaluation of the effect of restored force capacity on functional outcome in a way that is not possible experimentally.
Simultaneous nerve transfer to suprascapular and axillary nerves yields the best simulated biomechanical outcome for lower magnitudes of muscle force recovery in this computer model. Axillary nerve transfer performs nearly as well as the combined transfer, whereas suprascapular nerve transfer is more sensitive to the magnitude of reinnervation and is therefore avoided.
上臂丛神经损伤后神经移位后的功能能力取决于目标肌肉力量恢复的功能和程度。在针对腋神经、肩胛上神经或两者进行神经移位后,面对有限的肌肉力量恢复,功能能力是否恢复尚不清楚。
我们使用计算机模型模拟在保持功能性肩部姿势的同时屈曲肘部的3种神经移位情况。我们评估了执行该任务所需的最小恢复力能力、相邻肌肉的相关代偿情况以及肌肉协调改变对运动努力的影响。
模型模拟期望运动所需的腋神经、肩胛上神经和联合神经移位恢复的最小力量分别为未受损肌肉力量能力的25%、40%和15%。当三角肌麻痹时,冈下肌和肩胛下肌产生更高的肩关节外展力矩以代偿三角肌无力。对于所有情况,随着恢复力能力的降低,运动努力增加。
联合腋神经和肩胛上神经移位执行期望的肘部屈曲任务所需的恢复力能力最小,而单独的肩胛上神经移位执行相同任务所需的恢复力能力最大。尽管代偿机制使所有情况在肩部肌肉减弱的情况下仍能执行期望的运动,但代偿增加了运动努力。动态模拟能够以实验无法实现的方式独立评估恢复力能力对功能结果的影响。
在该计算机模型中,同时向肩胛上神经和腋神经进行神经移位在肌肉力量恢复程度较低时产生最佳的模拟生物力学结果。腋神经移位的效果与联合移位相近,而肩胛上神经移位对神经再支配程度更敏感,因此应避免使用。