JUM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peer, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bodner, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peer, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bodner, G.
© 2003 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
J Ultrasound Med 22:1317-1322 • 0278-4297

Sonographic Evaluation of Primary Peripheral Nerve Repair

Siegfried Peer, MD, Christoph Harpf, MD, Johann Willeit, MD, Hildegunde Piza-Katzer, MD and Gerd Bodner, MD

Departments of Radiology (S.P., G.B.), Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (C.H., H.P.-K.), and Neurology (J.W.), Innsbruck University Hospital, and Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Quality Control in Plastic Surgery (C.H., H.P.-K.), Innsbruck, Austria.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Siegfried Peer, MD, Department of Radiology, Innsbruck University Hospital, Anichstrasse 35, A-6020 Innsbruck, Austria. E-mail: siegfried.peer{at}uibk.ac.at.

Objective. This feasibility study was undertaken to define the potential of sonography for the follow-up evaluation of patients with surgical repair after nerve transection and persistent impairment of nerve function. Methods. Nineteen patients with primary repair of a transected peripheral nerve because of direct trauma or complex fractures were evaluated with sonography. All patients had persistent clinical symptoms and neurologic signs of impaired nerve function. In 11 patients who underwent second operations, the intraoperative findings were correlated with those of sonography. Results. Reliable identification of repaired nerves with sonography was feasible in all patients. However, in some cases, sufficient visualization of the site of nerve coaptation was problematic because of extensive scarring. Sonographic findings included the appearance of partial discontinuity of nerve fascicles, detection of neuromas, and compression of nerves by overlying scars. Surgical correlation with sonographic findings was excellent for neuroma detection; however, definition of nerve continuity on sonography was sometimes impaired by scarring. Conclusions. Sonography has a high potential for follow-up examinations of peripheral nerves in relation to previous nerve repair in patients with persistent neurologic signs and symptoms of nerve impairment. Sonography may help in decisions for follow-up surgery by identifying lesions such as neuromas in continuity or discontinuous nerve elements—lesions that will possibly benefit from a second look.

Key Words: nerve • sonography • surgery • trauma







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.