| Literature DB >> 31721481 |
Bao-Fu Yu1, Li-Wen Chen2,3, Yan-Qun Qiu2,3, Jing Xu1, Hua-Wei Yin1, Qin-Ying Li3, Wen-Dong Xu1,2,3,4,5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We previously reported transferring seventh cervical (C7) nerve from unaffected side to affected side in patients with spastic hemiplegia due to chronic cerebral injury, to improve function and reduce spasticity of paralyzed upper limb. In the clinics, some patients also reported changes of spasticity in their lower limb, which could not be detected by routine physical examinations. Pennation angle of muscle can indirectly reflect the condition of spasticity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether this upper limb procedure may affect spasticity of lower limb, using ultrasonography to detect changes of muscle pennation angle (PA).Entities:
Keywords: cervical nerve transfer; interlimb interaction; load distribution; pennation angle; spastic hemiplegia; ultrasonography
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31721481 PMCID: PMC6908868 DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain Behav Impact factor: 2.708
Figure 1The diagrammatic sketch of contralateral seventh cervical (C7) nerve transfer surgery. The C7 nerve on the paralyzed side is cur near the intervertebral foramen, and the C7 nerve on the nonparalyzed side is cut as distally as possible, proximal to the point at which it combines with the fibers of other brachial plexus nerves. The cut end of the C7 nerve on the nonparalyzed side was drawn through the prespinal route to the paralyzed side and anastomosed directly (without a graft) to the cut end of the C7 nerve on the paralyzed side by means of microsurgical epineurium suturing (Zheng et al., 2018)
Figure 2The pennation angle measured by ultrasonography. (a) The diagrammatic sketch of geometric arrangement of muscle fibers in pennate muscle. Pennation angle (θ) was defined as the angle of insertion of the muscle fascicle into the deep aponeurosis. (b) Pennation angle is shown on ultrasonography imaging. Comparisons of the pennation angle measured by ultrasonography. (c) Comparison of preoperative pennation angle between affected and unaffected lower limbs. (d) Comparison of pennation angle between preoperative and postoperative values on the affected lower limb. (e) Comparison of pennation angle between preoperative and postoperative values on the unaffected lower limb. AS, affected side; Postop, postoperation; Preop, preoperation; US, unaffected side. ***p < .001
Figure 3Plantar load distribution of the lower limbs. (a) The diagrammatic sketch from the homepage of Zebris FDM software shows the test was performed in a bipedal position. (b) In the Zebris FDM software, the pressure map of plantar load distribution of a healthy people was created. (c) Comparison of the plantar load distribution of affected forefoot between preoperative and postoperative values. (d) A typical case whose postoperative plantar load distribution of affected forefoot was significantly reduced compared to that of preoperative load with backfoot load increasing significantly. ***p < .001; **p < .01
Clinical characteristics of the 12 patients before contralateral seventh cervical nerve transfer surgery
| Patients | Age (year) | Sex | Cause of injury |
Years Postinjury | Affected side | MAS score (lower limb) | MAS score (upper limb) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 48 | F | Stroke | 5 | L | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | 55 | M | Stroke | 4 | R | 2 | 1 |
| 3 | 17 | F | Cerebral palsy | 17 | R | 2 | 2 |
| 4 | 62 | M | Stroke | 4 | L | 1+ | 2 |
| 5 | 56 | M | Stroke | 5 | R | 2 | 1+ |
| 6 | 49 | M | Stroke | 3 | R | 2 | 2 |
| 7 | 52 | M | Stroke | 5 | R | 2 | 1 |
| 8 | 27 | F | Traumatic brain injury | 5 | L | 3 | 2 |
| 9 | 65 | M | Stroke | 7 | R | 1+ | 2 |
| 10 | 45 | M | Stroke | 6 | R | 1+ | 2 |
| 11 | 59 | M | Stroke | 5 | L | 3 | 2 |
| 12 | 51 | M | Traumatic brain injury | 6 | R | 2 | 1+ |
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; MAS, Modified Ashworth Scale.
Figure 4Schematic indicating the interlimb pathways and central pattern generator (CPG) with reference to literature (Kaupp et al., 2018; Klarner & Zehr, 2018; Minassian et al., 2017). Neuronal connections were represented with arrows and can be either excitatory or inhibitory. CPG for each limb can be affected and affect each other, and also receive sensory feedback input. E, extension; F, flexion