MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Study to Determine the Incidence and Examine the Implications of Phrenic Nerve Dysfunction in Cervical Spine Hyper‐Flexion/Extension Injury

2017· article· en· W4389019644 on OpenAlexaff
Kaitlin Amanda Turner, David M. Walton, Marjorie Johnson, Katherine E. Willmore

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma Management and Diagnosis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiaphragmatic breathingDermatomePhrenic nerveAnatomyCervical vertebraeSurgeryAnesthesiaRespiratory systemPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The phrenic nerve (PN) is a bilateral peripheral nerve originating primarily from the anterior rami of C4 with varying contributions from C3 and C5. It courses inferiorly along the anterior scalene deep to the pre‐vertebral fascia, passes posterior to the first rib entering the thorax to innervate each hemi‐diaphragm, respectively. The PN is the only motor input to the diaphragm; its activation results in diaphragmatic contraction, facilitating inspiration, and breathing. Cervical hyper‐flexion/extension injury (CHFEI) is a common consequence of motor vehicle collisions (MVC). The extension moment may result in damage to the anterior scalene. Based on the path and anatomical location of the PN in the neck and the mechanism of CHFEIs there is potential for injury to the PN to occur during MVCs. Injury or damage to the PN can cause a range of dysfunctions including shortness of breath (SOB), altered breathing patterns (ABP), the inability to breathe independently, referred pain to C3‐5 dermatomes, and altered core control. However, to our knowledge, investigation of damage to the PN is not evaluated clinically following cervical trauma. This is a potential gap in the literature that needs to be investigated as PN injury may result in un‐ or misdiagnosed ABPs, SOB, and/or chronic pain in the C3‐5 dermatome region. This study aims to suggest potential sites of adhesion of the PN and propose treatment strategies based on its' anatomical path and determine the prevalence and implications of symptoms suggestive of PN injury secondary to CHFEI. Methodology Detailed dissection of the PN along its course in the anterior neck and thorax to its innervation of the diaphragm was completed on embalmed (n=9) and fresh/frozen (n=2) cadavers to examine potential sites where damage to the PN or adhesions of surrounding tissues would be more susceptible. Results In both embalmed and fresh/frozen cadavers the PN consistently courses along the anterior scalene either bound tightly between the anterior scalene and pre‐vertebral fascia or adhered directly to the pre‐vertebral fascia. It's consistently incorporated within the fascial sheath surrounding the subclavian artery/vein, and the mobility of the PN is minimal until the surrounding pre‐vertebral fascia and/or fascial sheath surrounding the sublacian artery/vein is removed. Discussion The limited mobility of the PN suggests that a CHFEI could result in a traction injury of the PN, which could cause ABP, SOB, and/or pain in the C3‐5 dermatome region. Injury to tissues surrounding the PN, especially the pre‐vertebral fascia, could cause adhesions and further limit mobility of the PN resulting in similar symptoms as those present with PN injury. To determine if PN injury is assessed clinically in patients that have sustained CHFEI a survey will be sent to clinicians. As well, a patient intake form will be created to determine the prevalence of symptoms present post CHFEI that could be related to PN injury. Future study will include measurements of PN mobility with cervical positions that would mimic those typically present in CHFEI's.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicTrauma Management and DiagnosisFrench-language works237,207