Restoration of elbow active flexion in children with amyoplasia: What is the better age to do the operation?

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The absence of active elbow flexion is the most common problem in children with amyoplasia, leading to daily living difficulties. Many variants of muscle transfer are used for the restoration of active elbow flexion. The pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi muscles are the most used muscles for this purpose; however, the optimal age for these operations is not reported in the literature.

AIM: This study aimed to determine the optimal age of children with amyoplasia for the restoration of active elbow flexion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The retrospective study involved 61 patients (90 upper limbs) with amyoplasia (30 [49%] girls and 31 [51%] boys) who were examined and treated between 2011 and 2020. In 46 (51.1%) cases, we used major muscles, and in 44 (48.9%) cases, the latissimus dorsi muscle was used as a donor muscle. All patients were divided into four groups: group 1 included children aged 1–3 years (n = 17, 27.9%); group 2, 3–7 years (n = 30, 49.2%); group 3, 7–11 years (n = 8, 13.1%), and group 4, 12–18 years (n = 6, 9.8%). The clinical examination of the patients was conducted before and after the operation (≥6 months). Statistical data processing was performed using Statistica 10 and SAS JMP 11. To describe the numerical scales, the average value and standard deviation (M ± SD) were used.

RESULTS: The age of the patients at the time of surgery was 5.16 ± 3.72 years, and the postoperative follow-up period was 41.93 ± 30.13 months. Elbow flexion contractures were observed mainly in groups 1–3 (p < 0.05). The greatest changes in indicators such as the strength of forearm flexor muscles, active elbow flexion, and function of the elbow were noted in group 1 (p < 0.05). The same postoperative indicators were worse in group 4 than in younger patients (p < 0.05). Groups 3 and 4 had less strength of the donor muscles than groups 1 and 2 (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: The retrospective analysis of the results of the restoration of active elbow flexion in children with amyoplasia allowed us to recommend these operations in children aged 1–3 years. The prevention of elbow flexion contractures and the formation of a new stereotype of movement help improve the self-ability of these patients and the treatment results.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Olga E. Agranovich

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: olga_agranovich@yahoo.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6655-4108
SPIN-code: 4393-3694
Scopus Author ID: 56913386600
ResearcherId: B-3334-2019

MD, PhD, Dr. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Ekaterina V. Petrova

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: pet_kitten@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1596-3358
SPIN-code: 2492-1260
Scopus Author ID: 57194563255

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Svetlana I. Trofimova

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: trofimova_sv@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2690-7842
SPIN-code: 5833-6770
Scopus Author ID: 57193275907

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Sergey F. Batkin

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: sergey-batkin@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9992-8906
SPIN-code: 5173-9340

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Evgeniya A. Kochenova

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: jsummer84@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6231-8450
SPIN-code: 4346-5431
Scopus Author ID: 57193275508

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Vladimir M. Kenis

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: kenis@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7651-8485
SPIN-code: 5597-8832
Scopus Author ID: 36191914200
ResearcherId: K-8112-2013

MD, PhD, Dr. Sci. (Med.), Professor

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Andrey V. Sapogovskiy

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: sapogovskiy@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5762-4477
SPIN-code: 2068-2102
Scopus Author ID: 57193257532

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Evgenii V. Melchenko

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: emelchenko@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1139-5573
SPIN-code: 1552-8550
Scopus Author ID: 55022869800

MD, PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Konstantin A. Afonichev

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Children’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery

Email: afonichev@list.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6460-2567
SPIN-code: 5965-6506

MD, PhD, Dr. Sci. (Med.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

Evgeniy D. Blagoveschenskiy

H. Turner National Medical Research Center for Сhildren’s Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery; National Research University “Higher School of Economics”

Author for correspondence.
Email: eblagovechensky@hse.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0955-6633
SPIN-code: 2811-5723
Scopus Author ID: 6506349269
ResearcherId: B-5037-2014

PhD, Cand. Sci. (Biol.)

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Moscow

References

  1. Bevan WP, Hall JG, Bamshad M, et al. Arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (amyoplasia): an orthopaedic perspective. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27(5):594–600. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e318070cc76
  2. Hall JG. Arthrogryposis multiplex congenita: etiology, genetics, classification, diagnostic approach, and general aspects. J Pediatr Orthop B. 1997;6(3):159–166.
  3. Doyle JR, James PM, Larsen LJ, et al. Restoration of elbow flexion in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita. J Hand Surg Am. 1980;5(2):149–152. doi: 10.1016/s0363-5023(80)80146-8.
  4. Van Heest A, Waters PM, Simmons BP. Surgical treatment of arthrogryposis of the elbow. J Hand Surg Am. 1998;23(6):1063–1070.
  5. Ezaki M. Treatment of the upper limb in the child with arthrogryposis. Hand Clin. 2000;16(4):703–711.
  6. Gagnon E, Fogelson N, Seyfer AE. Use of the latissimus dorsi muscle to restore elbow flexion in arthrogryposis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106(7):1582–1585. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200012000-00022
  7. Lahoti O, Bell MJ. Transfer of pectoralis major in arthrogryposis to restore elbow flexion: deteriorating results in the long term. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(6):858–860. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.87B6.15506
  8. Chomiak J, Dungl P. Reconstruction of elbow flexion in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita type I. Part I: surgical anatomy and vascular and nerve supply of the pectoralis major muscle as a basis for muscle transfer. J Child Orthop. 2008;2(5):357–364. doi: 10.1007/s11832-008-0130-0
  9. Gogola GR, Ezaki M, Oishi SN, et al. Long head of the triceps muscle transfer for active elbow flexion in arthrogryposis. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg. 2010;14:121–124. doi: 10.1097/BTH.0b013e3181da07aa
  10. Chomiak J, Dungl P, Včelák J. reconstruction of elbow flexion in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita type I. J Pediatr Orthop. 2014;34(8):799–807. doi: 10.1097/bpo.0000000000000204
  11. Takagi T, Seki A, Kobayashi Y, et al. Isolated muscle transfer to restore elbow flexion in children with arthrogryposis. J Hand Surg Asian Pac. 2016;21(1):44–48. doi: 10.1142/S2424835516500053
  12. Zargarbashi R, Nabian MH, Werthel JD, et al. Is bipolar latissimus dorsi transfer a reliable option to restore elbow flexion in children with arthrogryposis? A review of 13 tendon transfers. Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;26(11):2004–2009. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.04.002
  13. Oishi S, Agranovich O, Zlotolow D, et al. Treatment and outcomes of arthrogryposis in the upper extremity. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2019;181(3):363–371. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31722
  14. Agranovich OE, Kochenova EA, Trofimova SI, et al. Restoration of elbow active flexion via latissimus dorsii transfer in patients with arthrogryposis. Pediatric Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Reconstructive Surgery. 2018;6(3):5–11. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17816/PTORS6273-75
  15. Sochol KM, Edwards G 3rd, Stevanovic M. Restoration of elbow flexion with a free functional gracilis muscle transfer in an arthrogrypotic patient using a motor nerve to pectoralis major. Hand (NY). 2020;15(5):739–743. doi: 10.1177/1558944720923412
  16. Doyle JR, James PM, Larsen LJ, et al. Restoration of elbow flexion in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita. J Hand Surg Am. 1980;5(2):149–152. doi: 10.1016/s0363-5023(80)80146-8
  17. Takagi T, Seki A, Kobayashi Y, et al. Isolated muscle transfer to restore elbow flexion in children with arthrogryposis. J Hand Surg Asian Pac. 2016;21(01):44–48. doi: 10.1142/s2424835516500053
  18. Steen U, Wekre LL, Vøllestad NK. Physical functioning and activities of daily living in adults with amyoplasia, the most common form of arthrogryposis. A cross-sectional study. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(23):2767–2779. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1357211
  19. Agranovich OE, Savina MV, Blagoveshchensky ED. Compensatory and adaptive mechanisms in children with congenital multiple arthrogryposis in the absence of active flexion in the elbow joint. Problems of balneology, physiotherapy, and exercise therapy. 2021;98(1):31–37. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17116/kurort20219801131

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Strength of donor muscles depending on the patient’s age

Download (56KB)
3. Fig. 2. Use of the pectoralis major (PM) and latissimus dorsi (LD) muscles in different age groups to restore active flexion in the elbow joint

Download (56KB)
4. Fig. 3. Change over time of “extension deficit” before and after surgery in four age groups

Download (42KB)
5. Fig. 4. Change over time of “extension deficit” after surgery in four age groups in percentage

Download (34KB)
6. Fig. 5. Change over time of “forearm flexor strength” in four age groups before and after surgery

Download (45KB)
7. Fig. 6. Change over time of “forearm flexor strength” after surgery in four age groups in percentage

Download (37KB)
8. Fig. 7. Change over time of “active flexion” in four age groups before and after surgery

Download (40KB)
9. Fig. 8. Change over time of “active flexion” in four age groups after surgery in percentage

Download (34KB)
10. Fig. 9. Change over time of the “scale score” before and after surgery in patients of four age groups

Download (42KB)
11. Fig. 10. Change over time of the “scale score” after surgery in patients of four age groups in points

Download (33KB)

Copyright (c) 2023 Agranovich O., Petrova E.V., Batkin S.F., Kenis V.M., Sapogovskiy A.V., Blagoveschenskiy E.D.



СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС77-54261 от 24 мая 2013 г.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies