Evaluating the Ability of Brachial Plexus-Injured Patients to Control an Externally Powered (Myoelectric) Hand Prosthesis.
Journal
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
ISSN: 1535-1386
Titre abrégé: J Bone Joint Surg Am
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0014030
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 May 2024
10 May 2024
Historique:
medline:
10
5
2024
pubmed:
10
5
2024
entrez:
10
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Restoration of hand function after traumatic brachial plexus injury (BPI) remains a formidable challenge. Traditional methods such as nerve or free muscle transfers yield suboptimal results. Advancements in myoelectric prostheses, characterized by novel signal acquisition and improved material technology, show promise in restoring functional grasp. This study evaluated the ability of adults with a BPI injury to control an externally powered prosthetic hand using nonintuitive signals, simulating the restoration of grasp with a myoelectric prosthesis. It also assessed the effectiveness of a comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation in guiding treatment decisions. A multidisciplinary brachial plexus team assessed adults with compromised hand function due to BPI. The feasibility of amputation coupled with fitting of a myoelectric prosthesis for grasp reconstruction was evaluated. Participants' ability to control a virtual or model prosthetic hand using surface electromyography (EMG) as well as with contralateral shoulder motion-activated linear transducer signals was tested. The patient's input and injury type, along with the information from the prosthetic evaluation, were used to determine the reconstructive plan. The study also reviewed the number of participants opting for amputation and a myoelectric prosthetic hand for grasp restoration, and a follow-up survey was conducted to assess the impact of the initial evaluation on decision-making. Of 58 subjects evaluated, 47 (81%) had pan-plexus BPI and 42 (72%) received their initial assessment within 1 year post-injury. Forty-seven patients (81%) could control the virtual or model prosthetic hand using nonintuitive surface EMG signals, and all 58 could control it with contralateral uniscapular motion via a linear transducer and harness. Thirty patients (52%) chose and pursued amputation, and 20 (34%) actively used a myoelectric prosthesis for grasp. The initial evaluation was informative and beneficial for the majority of the patients, especially in demonstrating the functionality of the myoelectric prosthesis. The study indicates that adults with traumatic BPI can effectively operate a virtual or model myoelectric prosthesis using nonintuitive control signals. The simulation and multidisciplinary evaluation influenced informed treatment choices, with a high percentage of patients continuing to use the myoelectric prostheses post-amputation, highlighting its long-term acceptance and viability. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Restoration of hand function after traumatic brachial plexus injury (BPI) remains a formidable challenge. Traditional methods such as nerve or free muscle transfers yield suboptimal results. Advancements in myoelectric prostheses, characterized by novel signal acquisition and improved material technology, show promise in restoring functional grasp. This study evaluated the ability of adults with a BPI injury to control an externally powered prosthetic hand using nonintuitive signals, simulating the restoration of grasp with a myoelectric prosthesis. It also assessed the effectiveness of a comprehensive multidisciplinary evaluation in guiding treatment decisions.
METHODS
METHODS
A multidisciplinary brachial plexus team assessed adults with compromised hand function due to BPI. The feasibility of amputation coupled with fitting of a myoelectric prosthesis for grasp reconstruction was evaluated. Participants' ability to control a virtual or model prosthetic hand using surface electromyography (EMG) as well as with contralateral shoulder motion-activated linear transducer signals was tested. The patient's input and injury type, along with the information from the prosthetic evaluation, were used to determine the reconstructive plan. The study also reviewed the number of participants opting for amputation and a myoelectric prosthetic hand for grasp restoration, and a follow-up survey was conducted to assess the impact of the initial evaluation on decision-making.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 58 subjects evaluated, 47 (81%) had pan-plexus BPI and 42 (72%) received their initial assessment within 1 year post-injury. Forty-seven patients (81%) could control the virtual or model prosthetic hand using nonintuitive surface EMG signals, and all 58 could control it with contralateral uniscapular motion via a linear transducer and harness. Thirty patients (52%) chose and pursued amputation, and 20 (34%) actively used a myoelectric prosthesis for grasp. The initial evaluation was informative and beneficial for the majority of the patients, especially in demonstrating the functionality of the myoelectric prosthesis.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The study indicates that adults with traumatic BPI can effectively operate a virtual or model myoelectric prosthesis using nonintuitive control signals. The simulation and multidisciplinary evaluation influenced informed treatment choices, with a high percentage of patients continuing to use the myoelectric prostheses post-amputation, highlighting its long-term acceptance and viability.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38728379
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.23.00938
pii: 00004623-990000000-01096
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure: No external funding was received for this work. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/I8).
Références
Kretschmer T, Ihle S, Antoniadis G, Seidel JA, Heinen C, Börm W, Richter HP, König R. Patient satisfaction and disability after brachial plexus surgery. Neurosurgery. 2009 Oct;65(4)(Suppl):A189-96.
Rasulić L, Savić A, Živković B, Vitošević F, Mićović M, Baščarević V, Puzović V, Novaković N, Lepić M, Samardžić M, Mandić-Rajčević S. Outcome after brachial plexus injury surgery and impact on quality of life. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017 Jul;159(7):1257-64.
Midha R. Epidemiology of brachial plexus injuries in a multitrauma population. Neurosurgery. 1997 Jun;40(6):1182-8.
Shin AY, Bishop AT, Loosbroch MF, Spinner RJ. A multidisciplinary approach to the management of brachial plexus injuries: experience from the Mayo Clinic over 100 years. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2022 Dec;47(11):1103-13.
Maldonado AA, Poppler L, Loosbrock Rn MF, Spinner RJ, Bishop AT, Shin AY. Restoration of Grasp after Single-Stage Free Functioning Gracilis Muscle Transfer in Traumatic Adult Pan-Brachial Plexus Injury. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023 Jan 1;151(1):133-42.
Dodakundi C, Doi K, Hattori Y, Sakamoto S, Fujihara Y, Takagi T, Fukuda M. Outcome of surgical reconstruction after traumatic total brachial plexus palsy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Aug 21;95(16):1505-12.
Gu YD, Chen DS, Zhang GM, Cheng XM, Xu JG, Zhang LY, Cai PQ, Chen L. Long-term functional results of contralateral C7 transfer. J Reconstr Microsurg. 1998 Jan;14(1):57-9.
Songcharoen P, Wongtrakul S, Mahaisavariya B, Spinner RJ. Hemi-contralateral C7 transfer to median nerve in the treatment of root avulsion brachial plexus injury. J Hand Surg Am. 2001 Nov;26(6):1058-64.
Cantwell SR, Nelson AW, Sampson BP, Spinner RJ, Bishop AT, Pulos N, Shin AY. The Role of Amputation and Myoelectric Prosthetic Fitting in Patients with Traumatic Brachial Plexus Injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2022 Aug 17;104(16):1475-82.
Hruby LA, Gstoettner C, Sturma A, Salminger S, Mayer JA, Aszmann OC. Bionic Upper Limb Reconstruction: A Valuable Alternative in Global Brachial Plexus Avulsion Injuries-A Case Series. J Clin Med. 2019 Dec 20;9(1):23.
Aszmann OC, Roche AD, Salminger S, Paternostro-Sluga T, Herceg M, Sturma A, Hofer C, Farina D. Bionic reconstruction to restore hand function after brachial plexus injury: a case series of three patients. Lancet. 2015 May 30;385(9983):2183-9.
Wright TW, Hagen AD, Wood MB. Prosthetic usage in major upper extremity amputations. J Hand Surg Am. 1995 Jul;20(4):619-22.
Lombard A, Lavrard B, Pierrart J, Masmejean E. Indications for amputation after traumatic brachial plexus injury in adults: Case report and review of new prosthetic technologies. Hand Surg Rehabil. 2022 Feb;41S:S71-5.
Bergmeister KD, Salminger S, Aszmann OC. Targeted Muscle Reinnervation for Prosthetic Control. Hand Clin. 2021 Aug;37(3):415-24.
Ganesh Kumar N, Kung TA, Cederna PS. Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces for Advanced Control of Upper Extremity Prosthetic Devices. Hand Clin. 2021 Aug;37(3):425-33.
Doi K, Shigetomi M, Kaneko K, Soo-Heong T, Hiura Y, Hattori Y, Kawakami F. Significance of elbow extension in reconstruction of prehension with reinnervated free-muscle transfer following complete brachial plexus avulsion. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997 Aug;100(2):364-72, discussion 373-4.
Yeoman PM, Seddon HJ. Brachial plexus injuries: Treatment of the flail arm. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1961;43-B(3):493-500.
Parry CB. The management of injuries to the brachial plexus. Proc R Soc Med. 1974 Jun;67(6 Pt 1):488-90.
Rorabeck CH. The management of the flail upper extremity in brachial plexus injuries. J Trauma. 1980 Jun;20(6):491-3.
Ransford AO, Hughes SPF. Complete brachial plexus lesions: a ten-year follow-up of twenty cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1977 Nov;59-B(4):417-20.
Bedi A, Miller B, Jebson PJL. Combined glenohumeral arthrodesis and above-elbow amputation for the flail limb following a complete posttraumatic brachial plexus injury. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg. 2005 Jun;9(2):113-9.
Terzis JK, Vekris MD, Soucacos PN. Brachial plexus root avulsions. World J Surg. 2001 Aug;25(8):1049-61.
Giuffre JL, Bishop AT, Spinner RJ, Kircher MF, Shin AY. Wrist, first carpometacarpal joint, and thumb interphalangeal joint arthrodesis in patients with brachial plexus injuries. J Hand Surg Am. 2012 Dec;37(12):2557-63.e1.
Wilkinson MCP, Birch R, Bonney G. Brachial plexus injury: when to amputate? Injury. 1993 Oct;24(9):603-5.
Terzis JK, Vekris MD, Soucacos PN. Outcomes of brachial plexus reconstruction in 204 patients with devastating paralysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999 Oct;104(5):1221-40.
Sammer DM, Kircher MF, Bishop AT, Spinner RJ, Shin AY. Hemi-contralateral C7 transfer in traumatic brachial plexus injuries: outcomes and complications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Jan 18;94(2):131-7.
Wang SF, Li PC, Xue YH, Yiu HW, Li YC, Wang HH. Contralateral C7 nerve transfer with direct coaptation to restore lower trunk function after traumatic brachial plexus avulsion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 May 1;95(9):821-7, S1-2.
Doi K, Muramatsu K, Hattori Y, Otsuka K, Tan SH, Nanda V, Watanabe M. Restoration of prehension with the double free muscle technique following complete avulsion of the brachial plexus. Indications and long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 May;82(5):652-66.
Childress DS. Historical aspects of powered limb prostheses. Clinical Prosthetics & Orthotics. 1985;9(1):2-13.
Raschke SU. Limb Prostheses: Industry 1.0 to 4.0: Perspectives on Technological Advances in Prosthetic Care. Front Rehabil Sci. 2022 Mar 10;3:854404.