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:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/3219042
- author
- Chemnitz, Anette
LU
; Andersson, Gert
LU
; Rosén, Birgitta
LU
; Dahlin, Lars
LU
and Björkman, Anders
LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2013
- 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
- 2016-04-04 07:33:38
- date last changed
- 2022-04-23 08:23:50
@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}},
doi = {{10.1097/WNR.0b013e32835b6efd}},
volume = {{24}},
year = {{2013}},
}