Introduction: Spasticity is the main complication of many upper motor neuron disorders. Many studies describe neuro-orthopedic surgeries for the correction of joint and limb deformities due to spasticity, though less in the upper extremity. The bulk of care provided to patients with spasticity is provided by rehabilitation clinicians, however, few of the surgical outcomes have been summarized or appraised in the rehabilitation literature.Objective: To review the literature for neuro-orthopedic surgical techniques in the upper limb and evaluate the level of evidence for their efficacy in adult patients with spasticity.Method: Electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for English, French as well as Farsi languages human studies from 1980 to July 2, 2020. After removing duplicated articles, 2,855 studies were screened and 80 were found to be included based on the criteria. The studies were then divided into two groups, with 40 in each trial and non-trial. The results of the 40 trial articles were summarized in three groups: shoulder, elbow and forearm, and wrist and finger, and each group was subdivided based on the types of intervention.Results: The level of evidence was evaluated by Sackett's approach. There were no randomized control trial studies found. About, 4 studies for shoulder, 8 studies for elbow and forearm, 26 studies for wrist and finger (including 4 for the thumb in palm deformity), and 2 systematic reviews were found. Around, two out of 40 trial articles were published in the rehabilitation journals, one systematic review in Cochrane, and the remaining 38 were published in the surgical journals.Conclusion: Most surgical procedures are complex, consisting of several techniques based on the problems and goals of the patient. This complexity interferes with the evaluation of every single procedure. Heterogenicity of the participants and the absence of clinical trial studies are other factors of not having a single conclusion. This review reveals that almost all the studies suggested good results after the surgery in carefully selected cases with goals of reducing spasticity and improvement in function, pain, hygiene, and appearance. A more unified approach and criteria are needed to facilitate a collaborative, evidence-based, patient referral, and surgical selection pathway.

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Duloxetine on electrodiagnostic findings of Paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with breast cancer. This randomized, double-blind clinical trial was conducted on 40 patients with breast cancer who received Paclitaxel as their first chemotherapy session. All the patients were randomly allocated into two groups, intervention (20 subjects) and placebo (20 subjects). The intervention group received 30 mg duloxetine/day in the first week, followed by 60 mg (twice daily) until 8 weeks. The patient neurotoxicity questionnaire (PNQ) was used to evaluate the severity of neuropathy. Nerve conduction study was also performed. The evaluations were performed at the baseline and 8 weeks after the treatment. Out of 20 subjects in the placebo group, 10 (50%) patients had neurotoxicity (two milds, three moderate, four severe, and one incapacitated), according to PNQ. However, in the duloxetine group, two patients had mild neurotoxicity (P = 0.03). Significant differences between groups related to the mean of Median Sensory Latency (P <0.001), Median Motor Latency (P < 0.001), and Median Motor velocity (P = 0.001) were reported. However, the relative risk of polyneuropathy between the two groups (relative risk: 1) was not significant. Regarding the results, duloxetine could be an effective treatment for preventing paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with breast cancer, and an electrodiagnostic study confirmed this effect.

No abstract

No abstract