Impact of Upper Limb Motor Recovery on Functional Independence After Traumatic Low Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.

Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) causes devastating loss of upper limb function and independence. Restoration of upper limb function can have a profound impact on independence and quality of life. In low-cervical SCI (level C5-C8), upper limb function can be restored via reinnervation strategies such as nerve transfer surgery. The translation of recovered upper limb motor function into functional independence in activities of daily living (ADLs), however, remains unknown in low cervical SCI (i.e., tetraplegia). The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of patterns in upper limb motor recovery with functional independence in ADLs. This will then inform prioritization of reinnervation strategies focused to maximize function in patients with tetraplegia. This retrospective study performed a secondary analysis of patients with low cervical (C5-C8) enrolled in the SCI Model Systems (SCIMS) database. Baseline neurological examinations and their association with functional independence in major ADLs-i.e., eating, bladder management, and transfers (bed/wheelchair/chair)-were evaluated. Motor functional recovery was defined as achieving motor strength, in modified research council (MRC) grade, of ≥ 3 /5 at one year from ≤ 2/5 at baseline. The association of motor function recovery with functional independence at one-year follow-up was compared in patients with recovered elbow flexion (C5), wrist extension (C6), elbow extension (C7), and finger flexion (C8). A multi-variable logistic regression analysis, adjusting for known factors influencing recovery after SCI, was performed to evaluate the impact of motor function at one year on a composite outcome of functional independence in major ADLs. Composite outcome was defined as functional independence measure score of 6 or higher (complete independence) in at least two domains among eating, bladder management, and transfers. Between 1992 and 2016, 1090 patients with low cervical SCI and complete neurological/functional measures were included. At baseline, 67% of patients had complete SCI and 33% had incomplete SCI. The majority of patients were dependent in eating, bladder management, and transfers. At one-year follow-up, the largest proportion of patients who recovered motor function in finger flexion (C8) and elbow extension (C7) gained independence in eating, bladder management, and transfers. In multi-variable analysis, patients who had recovered finger flexion (C8) or elbow extension (C7) had higher odds of gaining independence in a composite of major ADLs (odds ratio [OR] = 3.13 and OR = 2.87, respectively, p < 0.001). Age 60 years (OR = 0.44, p = 0.01), and complete SCI (OR = 0.43, p = 0.002) were associated with reduced odds of gaining independence in ADLs. After cervical SCI, finger flexion (C8) and elbow extension (C7) recovery translate into greater independence in eating, bladder management, and transfers. These results can be used to design individualized reinnervation plans to reanimate upper limb function and maximize independence in patients with low cervical SCI.

Association of upper-limb neurological recovery with functional outcomes in high cervical spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: High cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) results in complete loss of upper-limb function, resulting in debilitating tetraplegia and permanent disability. Spontaneous motor recovery occurs to varying degrees in some patients, particularly in the 1st year postinjury. However, the impact of this upper-limb motor recovery on long-term functional outcomes remains unknown. The objective of this study was to characterize the impact of upper-limb motor recovery on the degree of long-term functional outcomes in order to inform priorities for research interventions that restore upper-limb function in patients with high cervical SCI. METHODS: A prospective cohort of high cervical SCI (C1-4) patients with American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade A-D injury and enrolled in the Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems Database was included. Baseline neurological examinations and functional independence measures (FIMs) in feeding, bladder management, and transfers (bed/wheelchair/chair) were evaluated. Independence was defined as score ≥ 4 in each of the FIM domains at 1-year follow-up. At 1-year follow-up, functional independence was compared among patients who gained recovery (motor grade ≥ 3) in elbow flexors (C5), wrist extensors (C6), elbow extensors (C7), and finger flexors (C8). Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the impact of motor recovery on functional independence in feeding, bladder management, and transfers. RESULTS: Between 1992 and 2016, 405 high cervical SCI patients were included. At baseline, 97% of patients had impaired upper-limb function with total dependence in eating, bladder management, and transfers. At 1 year of follow-up, the largest proportion of patients who gained independence in eating, bladder management, and transfers had recovery in finger flexion (C8) and wrist extension (C6). Elbow flexion (C5) recovery had the lowest translation to functional independence. Patients who achieved elbow extension (C7) were able to transfer independently. On multivariable analysis, patients who gained elbow extension (C7) and finger flexion (C8) were 11 times more likely to gain functional independence (OR 11, 95% CI 2.8-47, p < 0.001) and patients who gained wrist extension (C6) were 7 times more likely to gain functional independence (OR 7.1, 95% CI 1.2-56, p = 0.04). Older age (≥ 60 years) and motor complete SCI (AIS grade A-B) reduced the likelihood of gaining independence. CONCLUSIONS: After high cervical SCI, patients who gained elbow extension (C7) and finger flexion (C8) had significantly greater independence in feeding, bladder management, and transfers than those with recovery in elbow flexion (C5) and wrist extension (C6). Recovery of elbow extension (C7) also increased the capability for independent transfers. This information can be used to set patient expectations and prioritize interventions that restore these upper-limb functions in patients with high cervical SCI.

Upper Limb Nerve Transfer Surgery in Patients With Tetraplegia.

Importance: Cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) causes devastating loss of upper extremity function and independence. Nerve transfers are a promising approach to reanimate upper limbs; however, there remains a paucity of high-quality evidence supporting a clinical benefit for patients with tetraplegia. Objective: To evaluate the clinical utility of nerve transfers for reanimation of upper limb function in tetraplegia. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective case series, adults with cervical SCI and upper extremity paralysis whose recovery plateaued were enrolled between September 1, 2015, and January 31, 2019. Data analysis was performed from August 2021 to February 2022. Interventions: Nerve transfers to reanimate upper extremity motor function with target reinnervation of elbow extension and hand grasp, pinch, and/or release. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was motor strength measured by Medical Research Council (MRC) grades 0 to 5. Secondary outcomes included Sollerman Hand Function Test (SHFT); Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ); Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH); and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores. Outcomes were assessed up to 48 months postoperatively. Results: Twenty-two patients with tetraplegia (median age, 36 years [range, 18-76 years]; 21 male [95%]) underwent 60 nerve transfers on 35 upper limbs at a median time of 21 months (range, 6-142 months) after SCI. At final follow-up, upper limb motor strength improved significantly: median MRC grades were 3 (IQR, 2.5-4; P = .01) for triceps, with 70% of upper limbs gaining an MRC grade of 3 or higher for elbow extension; 4 (IQR, 2-4; P < .001) for finger extensors, with 79% of hands gaining an MRC grade of 3 or higher for finger extension; and 2 (IQR, 1-3; P < .001) for finger flexors, with 52% of hands gaining an MRC grade of 3 or higher for finger flexion. The secondary outcomes of SHFT, MHQ, DASH, and SF36-PCS scores improved beyond the established minimal clinically important difference. Both early (<12 months) and delayed (≥12 months) nerve transfers after SCI achieved comparable motor outcomes. Continual improvement in motor strength was observed in the finger flexors and extensors across the entire duration of follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: In this prospective case series, nerve transfer surgery was associated with improvement of upper limb motor strength and functional independence in patients with tetraplegia. Nerve transfer is a promising intervention feasible in both subacute and chronic SCI.

Optimizing nerve transfer surgery in tetraplegia: clinical decision making based on innervation patterns in spinal cord injury.

OBJECTIVE: Nerve transfers are increasingly being utilized in the treatment of chronic tetraplegia, with increasing literature describing significant improvements in sensorimotor function up to years after injury. However, despite technical advances, clinical outcomes remain heterogenous. Preoperative electrodiagnostic testing is the most direct measure of nerve health and may provide prognostic information that can optimize preoperative patient selection. The objective of this study in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) was to determine various zones of injury (ZOIs) via electrodiagnostic assessment (EDX) to predict motor outcomes after nerve transfers in tetraplegia. METHODS: This retrospective review of prospectively collected data included all patients with tetraplegia from cervical SCI who underwent nerve transfer at the authors' institution between 2013 and 2020. Preoperative demographic data, results of EDX, operative details, and postoperative motor outcomes were extracted. EDX was standardized into grades that describe donor and recipient nerves. Five zones of SCI were defined. Motor outcomes were then compared based on various zones of innervation. RESULTS: Nineteen tetraplegic patients were identified who underwent 52 nerve transfers targeting hand function, and 75% of these nerve transfers were performed more than 1 year postinjury, with a median interval to surgery following SCI of 24 (range 8-142) months. Normal recipient compound muscle action potential and isolated upper motor neuron injury on electromyography (EMG) were associated with greater motor recovery. When nerve transfers were stratified based on donor EMG, greater motor gains were associated with normal than with abnormal donor EMG motor unit recruitment patterns. When nerve transfers were separated based on donor and recipient nerves, normal flexor donors were more crucial than normal extensor donors in powering their respective flexor recipients. CONCLUSIONS: This study elucidates the relationship of the preoperative innervation zones in SCI patients to final motor outcomes. EDX studies can be used to tailor surgical therapies for nerve transfers in patients with tetraplegia. The authors propose an algorithm for optimizing nerve transfer strategies in tetraplegia, whereby understanding the ZOI and grade of the donor/recipient nerve is critical to predicting motor outcomes.

Nerve transfer surgery in cervical spinal cord injury: a qualitative study exploring surgical and caregiver participant experiences.

PURPOSE: To investigate perceptions of surgical participants and their caregivers regarding novel nerve transfer surgery to restore upper extremity function in cervical level spinal cord injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative study design was used. A multidisciplinary team developed semi-structured interview guides. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using basic text analysis. RESULTS: Participants had limited information about procedures to improve function after spinal cord injury. When discussing their choice to undergo nerve (as compared to traditional tendon) transfer surgery, they describe a desire to avoid post-operative immobilization. Barriers included the pre-operative testing, cost and inconvenience of travel for surgery, and understanding complex health information related to the procedure. While expectations matched descriptions of outcomes among participants and were generally positive, caregivers expressed disappointment. The long time interval for gains in function to be realized and relatively incremental gains achieved were frustrating to all. CONCLUSIONS: People with cervical spinal cord injury and their caregivers need more information about options to restore function and about realistic range of improvements with treatment. Further work to mitigate barriers and develop health information materials around nerve transfer surgery may improve medical decision making around and appropriate use of this newer treatment option.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONNerve transfer surgery is a novel and acceptable means of improving upper extremity function in the setting of cervical spinal cord injury.People with cervical spinal cord injury and their caregivers need information about options to restore hand and arm function and mitigation of barriers around these treatment options.

Evaluation for Late Nerve Transfer Surgery in Spinal Cord Injury: Predicting the Degree of Lower Motor Neuron Injury.

PURPOSE: Nerve transfer surgery is used to restore upper extremity function following cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) with substantial variation in outcomes. The injury pattern in SCI is complex and can include isolated upper motor neuron (UMN) and combined UMN/lower motor neuron (LMN) dysfunction. The purpose of the study was to determine the most effective diagnostic technique for determining suitable candidates for nerve transfer surgery in SCI. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed of patients who had nerve transfers to restore upper extremity function in SCI. Data collected included (1) preoperative clinical examination and electrodiagnostic testing; (2) intraoperative neuromuscular stimulation (NMS); and (3) nerve histopathology. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were compared to identify predictors of isolated UMN versus combined UMN/LMN injury patterns. RESULTS: The study sample included 22 patients with 50 nerve transfer surgeries and included patients ranging from less than 1 year to over a decade post-SCI. Normal recipient nerve conduction studies (NCS) before surgery corresponded to the intraoperative presence of recipient NMS and postoperative histopathology that showed normal nerve architecture. Conversely, abnormal recipient NCS before surgery corresponded with the absence of recipient NMS during surgery and patterns of denervation on postoperative histopathology. Normal donor preoperative manual muscle testing corresponded with the presence of donor NMS during surgery and normal nerve architecture on postoperative histopathology. An EMG of corresponding musculature did not correspond with intraoperative donor or recipient NMS or histopathological findings. CONCLUSIONS: NCS better predict patterns of injury in SCI than EMG. This is important information for clinicians evaluating people for late nerve transfer surgery even years post-SCI. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic II.

Using nerve transfer to restore prehension and grasp 12 years following spinal cord injury: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Nerve transfers are used routinely for reconstruction of hand function following lower motor neuron lesions. In people with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI), this novel and alternate reconstruction option may be useful to restore prehension and grasp, and improve hand function. CASE PRESENTATION: A 34-year-old male presented 12 years post-mid-cervical SCI. Pre-operative electrodiagnostic studies revealed intact lower motor neurons below the SCI level. He elected to undergo nerve transfer surgery to restore hand function. Intraoperative evaluation led to the transfer of a brachialis nerve to several median nerve recipient branches. Post surgery, he was discharged home and resumed activities of daily living. He achieved independent thumb and finger flexion function and continued to exhibit functional improvement at 4 years post surgery. DISCUSSION: These results should prompt referral for consideration of nerve transfer surgery-an exciting alternative to tendon transfer and neuroprostheses.

The Use of Nerve Transfers to Restore Upper Extremity Function in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.

BACKGROUND: Nerve transfer surgery to restore upper extremity function in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) is novel and may transform treatment. Determining candidacy even years post-SCI is ill defined and deserves investigation. OBJECTIVE: To develop a diagnostic algorithm, focusing on electrodiagnostic (EDX) studies, to determine eligibility for nerve transfer surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective descriptive case series. SETTING: Tertiary university-based institution. PATIENTS: Individuals with cervical SCI (n = 45). METHODS: The electronic medical records of people referred to the Plastic Surgery Multidisciplinary Upper Extremity Surgery in SCI clinic from 2010-2015 were reviewed. People were considered for nerve transfers to restore elbow extension or finger flexion and/or extension. Data including demographic, clinical evaluation, EDX results, surgery, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: EDX data, including nerve conduction studies and electromyography, for bilateral upper extremities of each patient examined was used to assess for the presence of lower motor neuron injury, which would preclude late nerve transfer. RESULTS: Based on our criteria and the results of EDX testing, a substantial number of patients presenting even years post-SCI were candidates for nerve transfers. Clinical outcome results are heterogeneous but promising and suggest that further refinement of eligibility, long-term follow-up, and standardized assessment will improve our understanding of the role of nerve transfer surgery to restore function in people with midcervical SCI. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients living with SCI are candidates for nerve transfer surgery to restore upper extremity function. Although the ultimate efficacy of these surgeries is not yet determined, this study attempts to report the criteria we are using and may ultimately determine the timing for intervention and which transfers are most useful for this heterogeneous population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Readmission after spinal cord injury: analysis of an institutional cohort of 795 patients.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies in other fields have suggested that healthcare on the weekend may have worse outcomes. In particular, patients with stroke and acute cardiovascular events have shown worse outcomes with weekend treatment. It is unclear whether this extends to patients with spinal cord injury. This study was designed to evaluate factors for readmission after index hospitalization for spinal cord injury. METHODS: A total of 795 consecutive patients over an 11-year period were analyzed. After excluding patients with chronic spinal cord injury and surgical care at an outside hospital, 745 patients remained. The primary outcome measure evaluated was 30-day readmission. Secondary measures include perioperative complications, readmission rate when discharged on the weekend, and the effect of race and insurance status on readmission rate. Univariate and multivariate analysis were utilized to evaluate the covariates collected. The χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, and linear and logistic regression methods were utilized for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 745 patients were analyzed after exclusions. Payer status did not affect length of stay, ICU length of stay, or perioperative complications. Neither weekend admission nor weekend operation affected length of stay, ICU length of stay, or readmission by 30 days. Patients undergoing weekend surgical treatment had lower perioperative complication rates (2.2% vs. 6.5% on weekday, P<0.01). Discharge on the weekend was associated with a significantly lower rate of readmission by 30 days (OR=0.07, 95% CI: 0.009-0.525, P<0.005). Payer status was associated with 30-day readmission (P<0.005). Patients with Medicare (20.8%) and Medicaid (20.1%) showed higher rates of readmission than patients with other payers. 21.1% of African-American patients were readmitted, versus 10.2% of other patients (Odds ratio: 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.36-3.27, P<0.001). Correcting for payer status lessened but did not eliminate the effect of race on readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Weekend admission did not increase perioperative complications or hospital length of stay. After discharge, patients with Medicaid and Medicare show higher rates of 30-day readmission, as do African-American patients. The effect of race on readmission is multifactorial, and may partially explained by the increased rate of Medicaid coverage in African-Americans in our institutions catchment area.

Nerve Transfers to Restore Upper Extremity Function in Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: Update and Preliminary Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spinal cord injury can result in profound loss of upper extremity function. Recent interest in the use of nerve transfers to restore volitional control is an exciting development in the care of these complex patients. In this article, the authors review preliminary results of nerve transfers in spinal cord injury. METHODS: Review of the literature and the authors' cases series of 13 operations in nine spinal cord injury nerve transfer recipients was performed. Representative cases were reviewed to explore critical concepts and preliminary outcomes. RESULTS: The nerve transfers used expendable donors (e.g., teres minor, deltoid, supinator, and brachialis) innervated above the level of the spinal cord injury to restore volitional control of missing function such as elbow extension, wrist extension, and/or hand function (posterior interosseous nerve or anterior interosseous nerve/finger flexors reinnervated). Results from the literature and the authors' patients (after a mean postsurgical follow-up of 12 months) indicate gains in function as assessed by both manual muscle testing and patients' self-reported outcomes measures. CONCLUSIONS: Nerve transfers can provide an alternative and consistent means of reestablishing volitional control of upper extremity function in people with cervical level spinal cord injury. Early outcomes provide evidence of substantial improvements in self-reported function despite relatively subtle objective gains in isolated muscle strength. Further work to investigate the optimal timing and combination of nerve transfer operations, the combination of these with traditional treatments (tendon transfer and functional electrical stimulation), and measurement of outcomes is imperative for determining the precise role of these operations. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.

Use of peripheral nerve transfers in tetraplegia: evaluation of feasibility and morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve transfers are being used to improve upper extremity function in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate feasibility and perioperative complications following these procedures. METHODS: Eligible SCI patients with upper extremity dysfunction were assessed and followed for a minimum of 3 months after surgery. Data regarding demographics, medical history, physical examination, electrodiagnostic testing, intraoperative nerve stimulation, recipient nerve histomorphometry, surgical procedure, and complications were collected. RESULTS: Seven patients had surgery on eight limbs, mean age of 28 ± 9.9 years and mean time from SCI injury of 5.1 ± 5.2 years. All patients had volitional elbow flexion and no volitional hand function. The nerve to the brachialis muscle was used as the expendable donor, and the recipients included the anterior interosseous nerve (AIN) (for volitional prehension), nerve branches to the flexor carpi radialis, and flexor digitorum superficialis. Two patients underwent additional nerve transfers: (1) supinator to extensor carpi ulnaris or (2) deltoid to triceps. No patients had any loss of baseline upper extremity function, seven of eight AIN nerve specimens had preserved micro-architecture, and all intraoperative stimulation of recipient neuromuscular units was successful further supporting feasibility. Four patients had perioperative complications; all resolved or improved (paresthesias). CONCLUSION: Nerve transfers can be used to reestablish volitional control of hand function in SCI. This surgery does not downgrade existing function, uses expendable donor nerve, and has no postoperative immobilization, which might make it a more viable option than traditional tendon transfer and other procedures.

The changing landscape of spinal cord injury.

In the past quarter century, spinal cord injury medicine has welcomed the proliferation of new medications and technologies that improve the survival and quality of life for people with spinal cord injury, but also endured the failure of strategies we hoped would salvage the cord in the acute phase. Surgical decompression and spinal stabilization should be pursued whenever indicated and feasible; however, there is no compelling evidence that early decompression facilitates neurological improvement. Methylprednisolone, the subject of over two decades of trials, has proven to be of marginal benefit in improving functional outcome. Recent advances in the management of the respiratory, cardiovascular, autonomic, endocrine, skeletal and integumentary systems have not only changed morbidity and survival of spinal cord injury patients but also improved quality of life. Progress has been made in the early diagnosis and effective treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, neurogenic shock, autonomic dysreflexia and orthostatic hypotension. Aggressive respiratory care for high cervical level of injury patients should include an option for phrenic nerve pacing as it is a viable rehabilitative strategy for appropriately selected patients. Pressure ulcers remain a significant psychological, financial, and functional burden for many people with SCI and for healthcare providers. This area will continue to require further work on early prevention and education. Despite extensive scientific and clinical data on neurogenic osteoporosis, there is no consensus regarding the best pharmacotherapeutic agents, dosing regimens, or rehabilitative strategies for prevention and treatment of bone loss. This chapter will focus on the advances.