Scollan Joseph P, Newman Jared M, Shah Neil V, Kuehn Erika, Koehler Steven M
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, State University of New York SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, United States.
Department of Orthopedics, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, Massachusetts, United States.
J Hand Microsurg. 2020 Apr;12(1):37-42. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1697064. Epub 2019 Nov 22.
Elbow flexion loss is a debilitating upper extremity injury. Surgical treatment options include nonfree muscle transfers (tendon transfers, nerve transfers, Steindler procedure, Oberlin transfers, and pedicled muscle transfers) or free muscle transfers. We sought to determine if free muscle transfers and nonfree muscle transfers have similar outcomes for elbow flexion reanimation. A literature search for studies evaluating free and nonfree muscle transfers for elbow flexion reanimation was performed. Included studies reported on transfer failure (strength <M3, unable to flex arm against gravity), strength, range of motion (ROM), or Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Pooled odds ratios were used to calculate failure rate, and pooled mean differences were used to calculate differences in strength, ROM, and DASH scores. Six studies were included ( = 331 patients). Free muscle patients experienced lower failure rates than nonfree muscle patients. There was no significant difference in ROM. A nonsignificant trend toward better mean strength and DASH scores among free muscle patients was observed. Free muscle transfers may be superior to nonfree muscle transfers for elbow flexion reanimation, given their lower failure rates. Well-powered future studies may reveal differences in strength and DASH scores between free and nonfree muscle transfers.
肘关节屈曲功能丧失是一种使人衰弱的上肢损伤。手术治疗方案包括非游离肌肉转移(肌腱转移、神经转移、施泰德勒手术、奥伯林转移和带蒂肌肉转移)或游离肌肉转移。我们试图确定游离肌肉转移和非游离肌肉转移在恢复肘关节屈曲功能方面是否有相似的结果。
对评估用于恢复肘关节屈曲功能的游离和非游离肌肉转移的研究进行了文献检索。纳入的研究报告了转移失败情况(肌力<M3,无法对抗重力屈曲手臂)、肌力、活动范围(ROM)或手臂、肩部和手部功能障碍(DASH)评分。采用合并比值比计算失败率,采用合并平均差计算肌力、ROM和DASH评分的差异。
纳入了六项研究(n = 331例患者)。游离肌肉转移患者的失败率低于非游离肌肉转移患者。ROM无显著差异。观察到游离肌肉转移患者的平均肌力和DASH评分有更好的趋势,但差异不显著。
鉴于游离肌肉转移的失败率较低,在恢复肘关节屈曲功能方面可能优于非游离肌肉转移。未来设计合理的研究可能会揭示游离和非游离肌肉转移在肌力和DASH评分方面的差异。