The Medial Antebrachial Cutaneous Nerve Is a Low-Morbidity Alternative to the Standard Sural Nerve Autograft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nerve interposition grafting is an important technique in nerve reconstructive surgery that is used when a primary repair is not feasible without significant tension. This study sought to evaluate the long-term morbidity of the medial antebrachial cutaneous (MABC) nerve as an alternative donor nerve in comparison with sural nerve harvest. METHODS: A single surgeon and institution retrospective chart review was performed to identify all patients who underwent nerve autografting using the sural and MABC as donor nerves between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2019. Surveys assessed overall patient satisfaction with surgery, as well as donor and recipient site morbidity, satisfaction, pain, numbness, and cold sensitivity. RESULTS: Of the 73 patients contacted, 54 agreed to participate, and 43 of 73 (58.9%) ultimately completed the survey: 28 MABC (65.1%) and 15 sural (34.9%). There were no significant differences between the sural and MABC groups in overall satisfaction with surgery, donor and recipient site satisfaction, pain, cold sensitivity, and effect on quality of life. Even though 66.7% of sural donor sites and 75% of MABC donor sites had residual numbness, the effect this had on quality of life was very low (2 and 3, respectively). CONCLUSION: The MABC is a safe alternative to the traditional sural nerve autograft. A small subset of patients undergoing nerve autograft harvest will experience long-term morbidity in the form of pain. Conversely, the more common presence of numbness is not reported as bothersome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".