Anthropometric Measures, Recurrent Laryngeal Nerves Diameter, Electromyographic Responses and Vocal Cord Paralysis Risk
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: To examine (1) the relationship between anthropometric measurements and recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) diameter; (2) whether thin RLNs have different baseline electromyographic (EMG) characteristics; (3) if thin or branched morphology is associated with increased risk of EMG adverse events, loss of signal (LOS) or vocal cord paresis/paralysis (VCP). METHODS: In this prospective study, anthropometric data were collected, including weight, height, body mass index (BMI), neck circumference, shoulder diameter, and circumference of the right middle finger (RMF) or right ring finger (RRF). RESULTS: , body weight < 120 kg, height < 175 cm, neck circumference < 40 cm, shoulder diameter < 50 cm, and RMF or RRF < 7.6 cm (all p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were detected in baseline EMG characteristics between thin and thick RLNs bilaterally (except for right RLN R2 latency). We had zero cases of LOS or VCP. In all branched nerves, motor fibers resided in the anterior branch. CONCLUSION: Multiple anthropometric factors were associated with RLN diameter. Most of the studied EMG signal characteristics did not statistically differ by RLN diameter. With zero events of LOS or VCP, our study is not powered to determine if thin diameter or branching are independent risk factors for RLN injury in a high-volume endocrine surgery practice utilizing IONM.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Anthropometric Measures, Recurrent Laryngeal Nerves Diameter, Electromyographic Responses and Vocal Cord Paralysis Risk
- Date Crossref
- 03/07/2025
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.