ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Cadaveric study to assess the feasibility of S1 neurectomy and contralateral S1 transfer for spastic hemiparesis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Future research focus and trends in nerve transplantation: a bibliometrics research from 2015 to 2024.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Application of CT images for reconstruction of adigital model of the sacral nerve canal.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Acquired brain injury causing spasticity, pain and loss of function is a major cause of disability and lower quality of life. Sacral 1 (S1) neurectomy claims promising outcomes in spastic hemiparesis. This cadaveric study was conducted to study the surgical anatomy, surgical approach and feasibility of S1 neurectomy and contralateral S1 (cS1) transfer. Methods: This study was conducted over a period of 10 months and 10 cadavers (age 18-60 years, 7 male and 3 female) were included in the study. 2 cadavers underwent endoscopic S1 neurectomy and 8 cadavers underwent open S1 neurectomy. Mean S1 root length and diameter were recorded using Schirmer tear strips and Vernier calliper. Feasibility of transfer was also assessed by measuring the length of donor nerve and distance between distal ends to proximal end of recipient nerve. Results: Mean thickness of right S1 root was 4.02 ± 1.5 mm and left S1 was 3.89 ± 1.18 mm. Mean length of right S1 root was 24.9 ± 4.56 mm and left S1 was 23.6 ± 2.86 mm. Endoscopically dissected length of S1 was much less as compared to open technique. Conclusion: S1 neurectomy is simple procedure to reduce spasticity in lower limb without any permanent deficit. It can be done by open as well as with endoscopic approach while for contralateral S1 transfer open approach need to be used.
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.