Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40666535›Full record

ReviewMediastinum (Hong Kong, China)2025

Phrenic nerve reconstruction after combined resection in malignant tumors: a narrative review.

Yosuke Hamada, Sakashi Fujimori, Souichiro Suzuki, Takahiro Karasaki, Shinichiro Kikunaga, Shusei Mihara

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mediastinum (Hong Kong, China), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yosuke HamadaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-4193-5072
Sakashi FujimoriDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Souichiro SuzukiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Takahiro KarasakiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Shinichiro KikunagaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Shusei MiharaDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Respiratory Center, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objective: Phrenic nerve resection is sometimes necessary during tumor removal when the nerve is infiltrated by malignancies. However, this can result in diaphragmatic paralysis and respiratory insufficiency. While mechanical ventilation and diaphragmatic pacing may temporarily support respiratory function, phrenic nerve reconstruction offers a potential long-term solution. Nevertheless, its use during tumor resection remains underreported. This review assesses current evidence on phrenic nerve reconstruction, focusing on surgical techniques, nerve graft selection, and the feasibility of minimally invasive approaches. Methods: A literature search was conducted in PubMed for phrenic nerve reconstruction studies. English-language studies published between January 1, 1980 and January 30, 2025, that focused on immediate phrenic nerve reconstruction following tumor resection were included in the review. Key Content and Findings: Phrenic nerve reconstruction can be performed either immediately after nerve resection or as a delayed procedure. Immediate reconstruction, especially when conducted concurrently with tumor resection, has been shown to promote optimal nerve regeneration and functional recovery. In contrast, delayed reconstruction is generally associated with greater technical challenges and less predictable outcomes. Direct anastomosis is preferable when feasible; however, nerve grafting is often required due to insufficient residual nerve length to achieve a tension-free repair. Among graft options, the intercostal nerve is favorable due to its anatomical proximity and minimal additional surgical burden, whereas the use of other nerves, such as the sural nerve, requires an additional incision at a separate site, which may be less desirable. Successful reconstruction can also be achieved using minimally invasive approaches such as video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS). Notably, the additional time required for reconstruction in minimally invasive procedures is manageable and does not significantly affect patient outcomes. Conclusions: Immediate phrenic nerve reconstruction, either by direct suturing or intercostal nerve grafting, is a feasible and effective method for preserving respiratory function. The ability to perform reconstruction using minimally invasive techniques further supports its clinical adoption. Given its advantages in functional recovery and its relatively low additional surgical burden, phrenic nerve resection followed by immediate reconstruction may be considered in most cases involving phrenic nerve invasion.

Indexed as

diaphragmintercostal nerveminimally invasivenerve reconstructionPhrenic nerve

Identifiers

PMID40666535
PMCPMC12260954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.