ArticleCureus2024
Invasive Procedures to the Neck and Chest and Hemidiaphragmatic Paralysis: Are They Always Causally Associated?
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three cases of hemidiaphragmatic paralysis are reported. One case was associated with an interscalene brachial plexus block, another with the insertion of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and a third case had undergone a coronary artery bypass grafting operation. In only one of these cases, there was a causal association, while in the other two, it was determined that the paralysis was coincidental. A change in the diaphragmatic position on the chest X-ray needs to be demonstrated, preferably also confirmed by ultrasound or a fluoroscopic sniff test, to show that the paralysis was a clear and immediate consequence of the procedure. One case described was most likely related to cervical nerve C3-C5 root compression confirmed on a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and not due to the procedure. This case shows that cervical root compression at C3-C5 by disk prolapse should also be considered. This was also suspected in another case; however, an MRI could not be performed after discussing the risks with the patient. When the paralysis has no temporal relationship with the procedure, primary or secondary intrathoracic malignancy and concurrent neurological disease must also be excluded by computed tomography of the thorax. The surgical and interventional causes of phrenic nerve injury and the relative evidence base are discussed.
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.