ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2018
In vivo nerve identification in head and neck surgery using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Point Projection Mapping System for Tracking, Registering, Labeling, and Validating Optical Tissue Measurements.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Label-free intraoperative nerve detection and visualization using ratiometric diffuse reflectance spectroscopy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Signal to noise ratio quantifies the contribution of spectral channels to classification of human head and neck tissuesJournal of biomedical optics · 2023Article
- Model-based characterization platform of fiber optic extended-wavelength diffuse reflectance spectroscopy for identification of neurovascular bundles.Journal of biomedical optics · 2022Article
- Layer thickness prediction and tissue classification in two-layered tissue structures using diffuse reflectance spectroscopy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCareful identification of nerves during head and neck surgery is essential to prevent nerve damage. Currently, nerves are identified based on anatomy and appearance, optionally combined with electromyography (EMG). In challenging cases, nerve damage is reported in up to 50%. Recently, optical techniques, like diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS) and fluorescence spectroscopy (FS) show potential to improve nerve identification.
methods212 intra-operative DRS/FS measurements were performed. Small nerve branches (1-3 mm), on near-nerve adipose tissue, muscle and subcutaneous fat were measured during 11 surgical procedures. Tissue identification was based on quantified concentrations of optical absorbers and scattering parameters.
resultsClinically comprehensive parameters showed significant differences (<0.05) between the tissues. Classification using k-Nearest Neighbor resulted in 100% sensitivity and a specificity of 83% (accuracy 91%), for the identification of nerve against surrounding tissues.
conclusionsDRS/FS is a potentially useful intraoperative tool for identification of nerves from adjacent tissues. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Observational proof of principle study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.