Comparing two shoulder muscle transfer techniques for nerve injury recovery

Functional outcome following conventional vs modified trapezius transfer with TFL graft in post traumatic brachial plexus injury a randomized controlled clinical trial - NIL

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 2

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2025/08/093053

Enrollment

Registered

2025-08-14

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2025-08-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: O- Medical and Surgical

Interventions

Intervention1: Modified Trapezius Transfer with Tensor Fascia Lata (TFL) Graft: Group B Modified Trapezius Transfer with Tensor Fascia Lata (TFL) Graft Surgical transfer of the trapezius muscle augm

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients aged 18 60 years with post-traumatic BPI affecting shoulder function. 2. Preserved trapezius muscle function (MRC Grade more than or equal to 4. 3. Willing to consent and participate in follow-up assessment s.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Prior surgery involving the shoulder girdle apart from the index procedure. 2. Neuromuscular disorders affecting the upper limb. 3. Any associated fracture around shoulder joint that reduces the passive range of movement 4. Graft site infection or comorbidities precluding surgery. 5. Birth brachial plexus injury patients.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To compare the improvement in active shoulder abduction between patients undergoing conventional trapezius transfer and those undergoing modified trapezius transfer using tensor fascia lata graftTimepoint: Regular follow up after surgery is needed at 6 weeks ,3 and 6 months for measuring functional outcome which will be recorded in the performa.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. To evaluate muscle strength (MRC grading) of the shoulder abductors (transferred trapezius) in both groups. 2. To assess & compare pain levels using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pre operatively & postoperatively at follow-up intervals. 3. To analyze patient-reported satisfaction & subjective functional outcomes using a structured feedback form. 4. To document & compare the intraoperative & postoperative complications in both surgical techniques. 5. To compare the rehabilitation timeline, cost effectiveness & ease of recovery between the two procedures. 6. To evaluate graft related morbidity (in the modified group)Timepoint: Regular follow up after surgery is needed at 6 weeks ,3 & 6 months for measuring functional outcome which will be recorded in the performa.;Timepoint:	—

Measure

Time frame

1. To evaluate muscle strength (MRC grading) of the shoulder abductors (transferred trapezius) in both groups. 2. To assess & compare pain levels using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pre operatively & postoperatively at follow-up intervals. 3. To analyze patient-reported satisfaction & subjective functional outcomes using a structured feedback form. 4. To document & compare the intraoperative & postoperative complications in both surgical techniques. 5. To compare the rehabilitation timeline, cost effectiveness & ease of recovery between the two procedures. 6. To evaluate graft related morbidity (in the modified group)Timepoint: Regular follow up after surgery is needed at 6 weeks ,3 & 6 months for measuring functional outcome which will be recorded in the performa.;Timepoint:

—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactShikha Shukla

AIIMS

rajmanas007@rediffmail.com9643735358

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026