Clinical anatomy of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve: Is there any safe zone for interventional approach?

Introduction: The lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (LACN) is a somatosensory nerve coursing in the lateral portion of the forearm. The nerve is located in a close proximity to the cephalic vein (CV) all along its course with a danger of being injured during venipuncture. The LACN also overlaps and communicates with the superficial branch of the radial nerve (SBRN) in the distal forearm and hand, making the awareness of their relationship of great importance in the treatment of neuroma. The aim of the study was to observe the relationship of the LACN to surrounding structures as well as its branching pattern and distribution. Materials and methods: Ninety-three cadaveric forearms embalmed in formaldehyde were dissected. The relationship of the LACN to surrounding structures was noted and photographed, and distances between the structures were measured with a digital caliper. The cross-sectional relationships of the LACN and SBRN to the CV were described using heatmaps. Results: The emerging point of the LACN was found distally, proximally or at the level of the interepicondylar line (IEL). The LACN branched in 76 cases (81.7 %) into an anterior and posterior branch at mean distance of 47.8 +/- 34.2 mm distal to the IEL. The sensory distribution was described according to the relationship of the LACN branches to the medial border of the brachioradialis muscle. The LACN supplying the dorsum of the hand was observed in 39.8 % of cases. The LACN and the SBRN intersected in 86 % of upper limbs with communications noticed in 71 % of forearms. The LACN was stated as the most frequent donor of the communicating branch resulting in neuroma located distal to the communication and being fed from the LACN. The relationship of the LACN and the CV showed that the IEL is the most appropriate place for the venipuncture due to maximal calibers of the CV and deep position of the LACN. The LACN was adjacent to the cubital perforating vein and the radial artery in all cases. The medial border of the brachioradialis muscle was observed less than 1.8 mm from the LACN. Conclusion: The study provides morphological data on the LACN distribution, branching pattern and relationship to surrounding structures in a context of clinical use in different spheres of medicine. The branching pattern of the LACN appears to be more constant compared to data provided by previous authors. We emphasized the meaning of cross-sectional relationship of the LACN to the CV to avoid venipuncture outside the cubital fossa if possible. The posterior branch of the LACN was predicted as appropriate donor of the graft for a digital nerve. The LACN appeared to be in a close proximity within the whole length of the brachioradialis muscle what the orthopedic surgeons must be concerned of. The meaning of the donor -nerve of the communicating branch in neuroma treatment was also introduced.