Advanced

Poor electroneurography but excellent hand function 31 years after nerve repair in childhood.

Chemnitz, Anette LU ; Andersson, Gert LU ; Rosén, Birgitta LU ; Dahlin, Lars LU and Björkman, Anders LU (2013) In NeuroReport 24(1). p.6-9
Abstract
Children, in contrast to adults, show an excellent clinical recovery after a peripheral nerve injury, which may be explained by better peripheral nerve regeneration and a superior plasticity in the young brain. Our aim was to study the long-term electrophysiological outcome after nerve repair in children and young adults and to compare it with the clinical outcome. Forty-four patients, injured at an age younger than 21 years, were assessed by electrophysiology (amplitude, conduction velocity and distal motor latency) at a median of 31 years after a complete median or ulnar nerve injury at the level of the forearm. Electrophysiological evaluation showed pathology in all parameters and in all patients, irrespective of age at injury. No... (More)
Children, in contrast to adults, show an excellent clinical recovery after a peripheral nerve injury, which may be explained by better peripheral nerve regeneration and a superior plasticity in the young brain. Our aim was to study the long-term electrophysiological outcome after nerve repair in children and young adults and to compare it with the clinical outcome. Forty-four patients, injured at an age younger than 21 years, were assessed by electrophysiology (amplitude, conduction velocity and distal motor latency) at a median of 31 years after a complete median or ulnar nerve injury at the level of the forearm. Electrophysiological evaluation showed pathology in all parameters and in all patients, irrespective of age at injury. No significant differences were observed in the electrophysiological results between those injured in childhood, that is, before the age of 12 years, and those injured in adolescence, that is, between 12 and 20 years of age. In contrast, the clinical nerve function was significantly better for those injured in childhood (87% of complete recovery, P=0.002) compared with those injured in adolescence. We conclude that the mechanism behind the superior clinical outcome in children is not located at the periphery, but is explained by cerebral plasticity. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
NeuroReport
volume
24
issue
1
pages
6 - 9
publisher
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
external identifiers
  • wos:000311970600002
  • pmid:23142851
  • scopus:84870871329
ISSN
1473-558X
DOI
10.1097/WNR.0b013e32835b6efd
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
cd6635be-752b-47d8-874e-0276010c92f9 (old id 3219042)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23142851?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2012-12-03 15:26:09
date last changed
2018-05-29 12:29:45
@article{cd6635be-752b-47d8-874e-0276010c92f9,
  abstract     = {Children, in contrast to adults, show an excellent clinical recovery after a peripheral nerve injury, which may be explained by better peripheral nerve regeneration and a superior plasticity in the young brain. Our aim was to study the long-term electrophysiological outcome after nerve repair in children and young adults and to compare it with the clinical outcome. Forty-four patients, injured at an age younger than 21 years, were assessed by electrophysiology (amplitude, conduction velocity and distal motor latency) at a median of 31 years after a complete median or ulnar nerve injury at the level of the forearm. Electrophysiological evaluation showed pathology in all parameters and in all patients, irrespective of age at injury. No significant differences were observed in the electrophysiological results between those injured in childhood, that is, before the age of 12 years, and those injured in adolescence, that is, between 12 and 20 years of age. In contrast, the clinical nerve function was significantly better for those injured in childhood (87% of complete recovery, P=0.002) compared with those injured in adolescence. We conclude that the mechanism behind the superior clinical outcome in children is not located at the periphery, but is explained by cerebral plasticity.},
  author       = {Chemnitz, Anette and Andersson, Gert and Rosén, Birgitta and Dahlin, Lars and Björkman, Anders},
  issn         = {1473-558X},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {6--9},
  publisher    = {Lippincott Williams & Wilkins},
  series       = {NeuroReport},
  title        = {Poor electroneurography but excellent hand function 31 years after nerve repair in childhood.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WNR.0b013e32835b6efd},
  volume       = {24},
  year         = {2013},
}