Supinator to posterior interosseous nerve transfer to restore hand opening in brachial plexus and spinal cord injury: a systematic review and individual patient-data meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) and lower trunk brachial plexus injury (BPI) commonly result in hand paralysis. Although restoring hand function is complex and challenging to achieve, regaining volitional hand control drastically enhances functionality for these patients. The authors aimed to systematically review the outcomes of hand-opening function after supinator to posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) transfer. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 16 studies with 88 patients and 119 supinator to PIN transfers were included (87 transfers for SCI and 32 for BPI). In most studies, the time interval from injury to surgery was 6-12 months. Finger extension and thumb extension (Medical Research Council grade ≥ 3/5) recovered in 86.5% (103/119) and 78.1% (93/119) of cases, respectively, over a median follow-up of 19 months. The rates of recovery were similar for the SCI and BPI populations (finger extension, 87.3% in SCI and 84.3% in BPI; thumb extension, 75.8% in SCI and 84.3% in BPI). Type of injury (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.17-6.4, p = 0.95), time from injury to surgery (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.8-1.29, p = 0.88), and age (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.06, p = 0.60) were not associated with odds of a successful outcome. Duration of follow-up was significantly associated with successful finger extension (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01-1.30, p = 0.026). No donor-associated supinator weakness was reported postoperatively given that patients had an intact bicep muscle preoperatively contributing to supination. CONCLUSIONS: Supinator to PIN transfer is a safe and effective procedure that can achieve successful restoration of digital extension in the SCI and BPI population at similar rates. Duration of follow-up was associated with superior outcomes, which was expected.

The demographic, clinical, and management differences between traumatic dens fracture patients with and without simultaneous atlas fractures.

Introduction: Atlas fractures often accompany traumatic dens fractures, but existing literature on the management of simultaneous atlantoaxial fractures is limited. Methods: We examined all patients with traumatic dens fractures at our institution between 2008 and 2018. We used multivariable logistic regression and ordinal logistic regression to identify factors independently associated with presentation with a simultaneous atlas fracture, as well myelopathy severity, fracture nonunion, and selection for surgery. Results: Two hundred and eighty-two patients with traumatic dens fractures without subaxial fractures were identified, including 65 (22.8%) with simultaneous atlas fractures. The distribution of injury mechanisms differed between groups (χ2 P = 0.0360). On multivariable logistic regression, dens nonunion was positively associated with type II fractures (odds ratio [OR] = 2.00, P = 0.038) and negatively associated with having surgery (OR = 0.52, P = 0.049), but not with having a C1 fracture (P = 0.3673). Worse myelopathy severity on presentation was associated with having a severe injury severity score (OR = 102.3, P < 0.001) and older age (OR = 1.28, P = 0.002), but not with having an atlas fracture (P = 0.2446). Having a simultaneous atlas fracture was associated with older age (OR = 1.29, P = 0.024) and dens fracture angulation (OR = 2.62, P = 0.004). Among patients who underwent surgery, C1/C2 posterior fusion was the most common procedure, and having a simultaneous atlas fracture was associated with selection for occipitocervical fusion (OCF) (OR = 14.35, P = 0.010). Conclusions: Among patients with traumatic dens, patients who have simultaneous atlas fractures are a distinct subpopulation with respect to age, mechanism of injury, fracture morphology, and management. Traumatic dens fractures with simultaneous atlas fractures are independently associated with selection for OCF rather than posterior cervical fusion alone.

Predictors of salvage therapy for parasagittal meningiomas treated with primary surgery, radiosurgery, or surgery plus adjuvant radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Parasagittal meningiomas (PM) are treated with primary microsurgery, radiosurgery (SRS), or surgery with adjuvant radiation. We investigated predictors of tumor progression requiring salvage surgery or radiation treatment. We sought to determine whether primary treatment modality, or radiologic, histologic, and clinical variables were associated with tumor progression requiring salvage treatment. METHODS: Retrospective study of 109 consecutive patients with PMs treated with primary surgery, radiation (RT), or surgery plus adjuvant RT (2000-2017) and minimum 5 years follow-up. Patient, radiologic, histologic, and treatment data were analyzed using standard statistical methods. RESULTS: Median follow up was 8.5 years. Primary treatment for PM was surgery in 76 patients, radiation in 16 patients, and surgery plus adjuvant radiation in 17 patients. Forty percent of parasagittal meningiomas in our cohort required some form of salvage treatment. On univariate analysis, brain invasion (OR: 6.93, p < 0.01), WHO grade 2/3 (OR: 4.54, p < 0.01), peritumoral edema (OR: 2.81, p = 0.01), sagittal sinus invasion (OR: 6.36, p < 0.01), sagittal sinus occlusion (OR: 4.86, p < 0.01), and non-spherical shape (OR: 3.89, p < 0.01) were significantly associated with receiving salvage treatment. On multivariate analysis, superior sagittal sinus invasion (OR: 8.22, p = 0.01) and WHO grade 2&3 (OR: 7.58, p < 0.01) were independently associated with receiving salvage treatment. There was no difference in time to salvage therapy (p = 0.11) or time to progression (p = 0.43) between patients receiving primary surgery alone, RT alone, or surgery plus adjuvant RT. Patients who had initial surgery were more likely to have peritumoral edema on preoperative imaging (p = 0.01). Median tumor volume was 19.0 cm3 in patients receiving primary surgery, 5.3 cm3 for RT, and 24.4 cm3 for surgery plus adjuvant RT (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Superior sagittal sinus invasion and WHO grade 2/3 are independently associated with PM progression requiring salvage therapy regardless of extent of resection or primary treatment modality. Parasagittal meningiomas have a high rate of recurrence with 80.0% of patients with WHO grade 2/3 tumors with sinus invasion requiring salvage treatment whereas only 13.6% of the WHO grade 1 tumors without sinus invasion required salvage treatment. This information is useful when counseling patients about disease management and setting expectations.

Atlas fractures with and without simultaneous dens fractures differ with respect to clinical, demographic, and management characteristics.

Background: Patients with simultaneous fractures of the atlas and dens have traditionally been managed according to the dens fracture's morphology, but data supporting this practice are limited. Methods: We retrospectively examined all patients with traumatic atlas fractures at our institution between 2008 and 2016. We used multivariable regression and propensity score matching to compare the presentation, management, and outcomes of patients with isolated atlas fractures to patients with simultaneous atlas-dens fractures. Results: Ninety-nine patients were identified. Patients with isolated atlas fractures were younger (61 ± 22 vs. 77 ± 14, P = 0.0003), had lower median Charlson Comorbidity Index (3 vs. 5, P = 0.0005), had better presenting Nurick myelopathy scores (0 vs. 3, P < 0.0001), and had different mechanisms of injury (P = 0.0011). Multivariable regression showed that having a simultaneous atlas-dens fracture was independently associated with older age (odds ratio [OR] =1.59 [1.22, 2.07], P = 0.001), worse presenting myelopathy (OR = 3.10 [2.04, 4.16], P < 0.001), and selection for surgery (OR = 4.91 [1.10, 21.97], P = 0.037). Propensity score matching yielded balanced populations (Rubin's B = 23.3, Rubin's R = 1.96) and showed that the risk of atlas fracture nonunion was no different among isolated atlas fractures compared to simultaneous atlas-dens fractures (P = 0.304). Age was the only variable independently associated with atlas fracture nonunion (OR = 2.39 [1.15, 5.00], P = 0.020), having a simultaneous atlas-dens fracture was not significant (P = 0.2829). Conclusions: Among patients with atlas fractures, simultaneous fractures of the dens occur in older patients and confer an increased risk of myelopathy and requiring surgical stabilization. Controlling for confounders, the risk of atlas fracture nonunion is equivalent for isolated atlas fractures versus simultaneous atlas-dens fractures.