ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Use of Electroneuromyography in the Diagnosis of Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Possible role of the botulinum toxin in the management of neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome: a systematic review.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Multimodality Imaging of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: Etiological and Anatomical Correlates.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Arterial Thoracic Outlet Syndrome-A Case Study of a 23-Year-Old Female Patient Diagnosed Using a Thermal Imaging Camera.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- General Overview and Diagnostic (Imaging) Techniques for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- Editorial: Thoracic outlet compression, thoracic outlet syndrome, with or without complications or sequelae: mechanisms, investigations and treatments.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (NTOS) is a disabling condition. Its diagnosis remains challenging and is mainly guided by examination. Yet, electrophysiological evaluations are the gold standard for diagnosis of entrapment syndromes. We aimed to assess the interest of electrophysiological evaluation to diagnose NTOS. A systematic literature research was performed using PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases to collect studies reporting results of electrophysiological assessment of patients with NTOS. Then, a meta-analysis was conducted. Nine studies were eligible and concerned two hundred and thirteen patients. Results were heterogenous among studies and the quality of evidence was very low to moderate. Data could not evaluate sensitivity or specificity of electrophysiological evaluations for NTOS. The meta-analysis found significantly decreased amplitudes of medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve SNAP (sensory nerve action potential), ulnar SNAP, median CMAP (compound motor action potential) and ulnar CMAP. Needle examination found abnormalities for the abductor pollicis brevis, first dorsal interosseous and adductor digiti minimi. Unlike most upper-limb entrapment syndromes, nerve conduction assessment only provided clues in favour of NTOS. Decreased amplitude for ulnar SNAP, medial antebrachial cutaneous SNAP, median CMAP and ulnar CMAP should be assessed, as well as needle examination. Larger studies are needed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of electrophysiology in NTOS diagnosis.
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.