量化 C7 脊神经切除术对供体上肢自发、患者主动运动的影响。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Plastic and reconstructive surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-15 DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000011825
Whitney E Muhlestein, Tommy Nai-Jen Chang, Rachel N Logue Cook, Kate W-C Chang, Johnny Chuieng-Yi Lu, Kevin C Chung, Lynda J-S Yang, Susan H Brown, David Chwei-Chin Chuang
{"title":"量化 C7 脊神经切除术对供体上肢自发、患者主动运动的影响。","authors":"Whitney E Muhlestein, Tommy Nai-Jen Chang, Rachel N Logue Cook, Kate W-C Chang, Johnny Chuieng-Yi Lu, Kevin C Chung, Lynda J-S Yang, Susan H Brown, David Chwei-Chin Chuang","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transfer of a healthy C7 spinal nerve is a tool for upper extremity reanimation in patients with severe brachial plexus injury (BPI). Its use remains controversial owing to concern for neurological injury to the donor arm. Utilizing wearable motion-sensor technology, we aimed to quantify donor arm morbidity after C7 spinal nerve harvest in patients with pan-BPI, reporting both the time and magnitude of donor arm movement in a real-world setting compared to healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventeen patients who underwent contralateral C7 (CC7) transfer for traumatic pan-BPI at least 2 years prior were compared to 14 healthy controls. Each participant wore an accelerometer on both arms for 7 consecutive days. The vector time (VT), or time of movement measured in hours/day, and the vector magnitude (VM), or magnitude of arm movement measured as a single vector magnitude per second, were collected and compared between groups. The correlation between VT and VM and time from C7 spinal nerve harvest was also calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At mean 7.7 years after C7 spinal nerve harvest, there was no difference between donor and control arms for VT (5.76±1.55] vs 5.45±1.22 hours, P = 0.56) or VM (2242236±753853 vs 1919223±579723 activity counts, P = 0.20), regardless of donor arm dominance. The C7 harvest cohort used the injured arm 53% of the time and with 27% of the power of the donor arm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in time or magnitude of arm movement between donor arms and the arms of healthy controls.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quantifying the Impact of C7 Spinal Nerve Harvest on Spontaneous, Patient-Initiated Movement of the Donor Upper Extremity.\",\"authors\":\"Whitney E Muhlestein, Tommy Nai-Jen Chang, Rachel N Logue Cook, Kate W-C Chang, Johnny Chuieng-Yi Lu, Kevin C Chung, Lynda J-S Yang, Susan H Brown, David Chwei-Chin Chuang\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011825\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Transfer of a healthy C7 spinal nerve is a tool for upper extremity reanimation in patients with severe brachial plexus injury (BPI). Its use remains controversial owing to concern for neurological injury to the donor arm. Utilizing wearable motion-sensor technology, we aimed to quantify donor arm morbidity after C7 spinal nerve harvest in patients with pan-BPI, reporting both the time and magnitude of donor arm movement in a real-world setting compared to healthy controls.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventeen patients who underwent contralateral C7 (CC7) transfer for traumatic pan-BPI at least 2 years prior were compared to 14 healthy controls. Each participant wore an accelerometer on both arms for 7 consecutive days. The vector time (VT), or time of movement measured in hours/day, and the vector magnitude (VM), or magnitude of arm movement measured as a single vector magnitude per second, were collected and compared between groups. The correlation between VT and VM and time from C7 spinal nerve harvest was also calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At mean 7.7 years after C7 spinal nerve harvest, there was no difference between donor and control arms for VT (5.76±1.55] vs 5.45±1.22 hours, P = 0.56) or VM (2242236±753853 vs 1919223±579723 activity counts, P = 0.20), regardless of donor arm dominance. The C7 harvest cohort used the injured arm 53% of the time and with 27% of the power of the donor arm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in time or magnitude of arm movement between donor arms and the arms of healthy controls.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011825\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011825","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:转移健康的 C7 脊神经是严重臂丛神经损伤(BPI)患者上肢复位的一种手段。由于担心供体手臂的神经损伤,其使用仍存在争议。利用可穿戴运动传感器技术,我们旨在量化泛BPI患者C7脊神经摘除术后供体手臂的发病率,报告在真实世界环境中与健康对照组相比供体手臂运动的时间和幅度:17名至少在两年前因外伤性泛脊髓损伤而接受对侧C7(CC7)转移的患者与14名健康对照者进行了比较。每位参与者连续 7 天在双臂上佩戴加速度计。收集并比较了矢量时间(VT)(即以小时/天为单位测量的运动时间)和矢量幅度(VM)(即以每秒单个矢量幅度为单位测量的手臂运动幅度)。此外,还计算了VT和VM与C7脊神经切断后时间的相关性:结果:C7脊神经摘除术后平均7.7年,供体臂和对照臂在VT(5.76±1.55] vs 5.45±1.22小时,P = 0.56)或VM(2242236±753853 vs 1919223±579723活动次数,P = 0.20)方面没有差异,与供体臂优势无关。C7摘取队列使用受伤手臂的时间为53%,供体手臂的力量为27%:结论:供体手臂与健康对照组手臂在手臂运动时间或幅度上没有明显差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quantifying the Impact of C7 Spinal Nerve Harvest on Spontaneous, Patient-Initiated Movement of the Donor Upper Extremity.

Background: Transfer of a healthy C7 spinal nerve is a tool for upper extremity reanimation in patients with severe brachial plexus injury (BPI). Its use remains controversial owing to concern for neurological injury to the donor arm. Utilizing wearable motion-sensor technology, we aimed to quantify donor arm morbidity after C7 spinal nerve harvest in patients with pan-BPI, reporting both the time and magnitude of donor arm movement in a real-world setting compared to healthy controls.

Methods: Seventeen patients who underwent contralateral C7 (CC7) transfer for traumatic pan-BPI at least 2 years prior were compared to 14 healthy controls. Each participant wore an accelerometer on both arms for 7 consecutive days. The vector time (VT), or time of movement measured in hours/day, and the vector magnitude (VM), or magnitude of arm movement measured as a single vector magnitude per second, were collected and compared between groups. The correlation between VT and VM and time from C7 spinal nerve harvest was also calculated.

Results: At mean 7.7 years after C7 spinal nerve harvest, there was no difference between donor and control arms for VT (5.76±1.55] vs 5.45±1.22 hours, P = 0.56) or VM (2242236±753853 vs 1919223±579723 activity counts, P = 0.20), regardless of donor arm dominance. The C7 harvest cohort used the injured arm 53% of the time and with 27% of the power of the donor arm.

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in time or magnitude of arm movement between donor arms and the arms of healthy controls.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
13.90%
发文量
1436
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.
期刊最新文献
Spontaneous recovery of active shoulder external rotation in patients with brachial plexus birth injury. Comparative effectiveness of pre-epiglottic baton plates and mandibular distraction in infants with Robin sequence. Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Intermediate Cleft Rhinoplasty. Predictors of Facial Synkinesis Severity. The Racial Representation of Cosmetic Minimally Invasive Procedure Patients and Physicians on Social Media.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1