Abstract
Purpose
The aim of this study was first to define first the anatomical relationships between the musculocutaneous nerve and the coracobrachialis, and then the induced modifications of these relationships by a preglenoid transposition of the vertical part of the coracoid process.
Materials and methods
Twenty-one embalmed adult trunks and upper limb were dissected. First the coracobrachialis and the musculocutaneous nerve were identified through a deltopectoral approach. We measured the distances between the lateral cord of the brachial plexus and the entry point of the nerve, between the inferior tip of the tip of the coracoid process and the penetration of the nerve or its twigs, and finally the angle between the general axis of the coracobrachialis and the axis of the musculocutaneous nerve. The same measures were performed after the coracoid bone block abutment.
Results
Proximal motor branches destined to the coracobrachialis varied from 0 to 3. Mean distance between the lateral cord of the brachial plexus and entry point of the nerve into the muscle was 47.2 mm before and 48.43 mm after the coracoid transfer. Mean angulations between the nerve and the muscle was 121° before and 136° after the transfer of the coracoid process. Mean distance between the inferior tip of the coracoid process and entry point of the nerve into the muscle was 55.7 mm, reduced to 48.6 mm after the coracoid transposition. Finally, the distance between the tip of the coracoid and the first motor twig entering the coracobrachialis was less than 50 mm in 75% of the cases with a mean value of 40.6 mm.
Conclusions
Lesion of the musculocutaneous nerve is a known complication of the coracoid bone block abutment procedure (Latarjet–Bristow). From this study we know that they are due to lengthening of the nerve and modification of the penetration angle of the nerve into the coracobrachialis. We also infer that some motor nerve destined to the coracobrachialis might be damaged during the proximal medial release of the muscle after the detachment of the pectoralis minor muscle.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allain J, Goutallier D, Glorion C (1998) Long-term results of the Latarjet procedure for the treatment of anterior instability of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg 80(A):841–852
Apaydin N, Bozkurt M, Sen T, Loukas M, Tubbs R, Urgurlu M, Tekdemir I, Elhan A (2008) Effects of the adducted or abducted position of the arm on the course of the musculocutaneous nerve during anterior approaches to the shoulder. Surg Radiol Anat 30:355–360
Bach B, O’Brien S, Warren R, Leighton M (1988) An unusual neurological complication of the Bristow procedure. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg 70A:458
Boardman N, Cofield B (1999) Neurologic complications of shoulder surgery. Clin Orthop 368:44–53
Burkhart S, DeBeer J (2000) Traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repairs: significance of the inverted-pear glenoid and the humeral engaging Hill–Sachs lesion. Arthroscopy 16:677–694
Caspari R (1985) Shoulder surgery in the athlete. Aspen, Rockville, MD, pp 15–24
Cole B, L’Insalata J, Irrgang J, Warner J (2000) Comparison of arthroscopic and open anterior shoulder stabilization. A two- to six-years follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg 82(A):1108–1114
Cole B, Warner J (2000) Arthroscopic versus open Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Clin Sports Med 19:19–48
Field L, Savoie F, Griffith P (1999) A comparison of open and arthroscopic Bankart repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8:195
Flatow E, Bigliani L, April E (1989) An anatomic study of the musculocutaneous nerve and its relationship to the coracoid process. Clin Orthop 244:166–171
Gazielly D (2000) Résultats des butées antérieures coracoïdiennes opérées en 1995 à propos de 89 cas. Rev Chir Orthop 86(Suppl I):103–109
Grana W, Buckley P, Yates C (1993) Arthroscopic Bankart suture repair. Am J Sports Med 21:348–353
Green M, Christensen K (1995) Arthroscopic Bankart procedure: two- to five-year follow-up with clinical correlation to severity of glenoid labral lesion. Am J Sports Med 23:276–281
Green M, Christensen K (1993) Arthroscopic versus open Bankart procedures: a comparison of early morbidity and complications. Arthroscopy 9:371–374
Guanche C, Quick D, Sodergren K, Buss D (1996) Arthroscopic versus open reconstruction of the shoulder with isolated Bankart lesions. Am J Sports Med 24:144–148
Helfet A (1958) Coracoid transplantation for recurring dislocation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg 40(B):198–202
Henry A (1973) Extensile exposure. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh
Higgins L, Warner J (2000) Arthroscopic Bankart repair. Operative technique and surgical pitfalls. Clin Sports Med 19:49–62
Hovelacque A (1927) Anatomie des nerfs crâniens et rachidiens et du système grand sympathique chez l’homme. Librairie Octave Doin, Paris
Karlsson J, Magnusson L, Ejerhed L, Hultenheim I, Lundin O, Kartus J (2001) Comparison of open and arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent shoulder dislocation in patients with a Bankart lesion. Am J Sports Med 29:538–542
Kim S, Ha K, Kim S (2002) Bankart repair in traumatic anterior shoulder instability: open versus arthroscopic technique. Arthroscopy 18:755–763
Kline D, Hudson A (1995) Nerve injuries: operative results for major nerve injuries, entrapments and tumors. W·B. Saunders, Philiadelphia, pp 397–460
Latarjet M (1958) Technique de la butée coracoïdienne pré-glénoïdienne dans le traitement des luxations récidivantes de l’épaule. Lyon Chir 54:604–607
Latarjet M, Neidhardt J, Morin A, Autissier J (1967) L’entrée du nerf musculo-cutané dans le muscle coraco-brachial. Compt Rendus Assoc Anat 138:755
Levigne C (2000) Résultat à long terme des butées antérieures coracoïdiennes. A propos de 52 cas au recul homogène de 12 ans. Rev Chir Orthop 86(Suppl 1):114–121
Levigne C (2000) Résultats à long terme des butées antérieures coracoïdiennes. A propos de 52 cas au recul homogène de 12 ans. Rev Chir Orthop 86(Suppl I):114–121
Lombardo S, Kerlan R, Jobe F, Carter V, Blazina M, Shields CJ (1976) The modified Bristow–Latarjet procedure for recurrent dislocation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg 58(A):256–261
Matsen FI, Thomas S, Rockwood CJ, Wirth M (1998) The shoulder. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 233–276
May V (1970) A modified Bristow operation for recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg 52A:1010
Patte D, Bancel P, Bernageau J (1985) Surgery of the shoulder. Marcel Dekker, New York
Rao G, Rao V (1955) Musculocutaneous nerve of the arm. J Anat Soc India 4:48
Richards R, Hudson A, Bertoia J, Urbaniak J, Waddell J (1987) Injury to the brachial plexus during Putti–Platt and Bristow procedures. A report of eight cases. Am J Sports Med 15:374
Richards R, Hudson A, Waddell J, Urbaniak J (1986) Injury to the brachial plexus during anterior shoulder repair. Orthop Trans 10:222
Rockwood C, Matsen F (1990) The shoulder. WB Saunders, Philadelphia
Rouvière H (1990) Anatomie Humaine. Descriptive et topographique, 12th edn. Edition Masson, Paris
Rowe C (1988) The shoulder. Churchill Livingston, New York, pp 165–291
Sperber A, Hamberg P, Karlsson J, Sward L, Wredmark T (2001) Comparison of an arthroscopic and an open procedure for posttraumatic instability of the shoulder: a prospective, randomized multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 10:105–108
Sunderland S (1978) Nerves and nerve injuries. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 796–801
Swenson T, Warner J (1995) Arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. Overview of indications, techniques, and efficacy. Clin Sports Med 14:841–862
Testut L, Jacob O (1922) Traité d’anatomie topographique avec applications médico-chirurgicales. Librairie Gaston Doin, Paris
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clavert, P., Lutz, JC., Wolfram-Gabel, R. et al. Relationships of the musculocutaneous nerve and the coracobrachialis during coracoid abutment procedure (Latarjet procedure). Surg Radiol Anat 31, 49–53 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-008-0426-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-008-0426-2