ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2027
Does Age Predict Outcomes of Triceps to Axillary Nerve Transfer?
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2027. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Factors influencing the results of radial nerve to triceps to axillary nerve transfers remain poorly defined. Therefore, the goal of this study is to compare radial to axillary nerve transfer outcomes by age, and to determine if age is a reliable predictor of outcome. Methods: A single center retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2015 and 2025. Exclusions included patients younger than 18 years, less than 1 year follow-up, or lack of MRC strength documented after surgery. Patients were subanalyzed by age: 18-39 years, 40-59 years, and ≥60 years. The primary outcome was recovery of M4 strength or greater. Subgroup analysis was performed to compare demographic, intraoperative variables, and postoperative outcomes. Results: Fifty-three patients (n = 20 aged 18-39 years, n = 16 aged 40-59 years, n = 17 aged ≥60 years) were included with a median follow-up time of 16.7 months. There were no differences in lesion location, BMI, smoking status, or preoperative MRC grade between groups. Younger patients were more likely to sustain high-energy injuries (85% in patients aged 18-39 years, 43.8% in patients aged 40-59 years, 17.6% in patients aged ≥60 years, Conclusions: Meaningful M4-M5 recovery was achieved across all age cohorts, with a nonsignificant trend toward lower recovery rates in older patients ( Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.