ArticleCurrent medical imaging2025
Clinical Efficacy of Ultrasound Guidance in Brachial Plexus Nerve Conduction Study: A Comparative Analysis.
Article in Current medical imaging, 2025. 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.
- Automated segmentation and quantitative measurement of cervical nerves in ultrasound images using an SZJ-SEG-based deep learning framework.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBrachial plexopathy is a diagnostically challenging condition that requires a comprehensive evaluation, including physical examination, imaging, and Electrodiagnostic (EDx). TESTING: Ultrasound guidance may improve the efficiency and precision of nerve conduction studies by addressing the limitations of blind techniques, such as discomfort and inaccurate localization.
methodsWe prospectively enrolled 30 patients undergoing electrodiagnostic testing. The left upper limb was examined with ultrasound guidance (Group A), while the right upper limb underwent the blind method (Group B). The examined nerves included the median, ulnar, radial, medial and lateral antebrachial cutaneous, axillary, musculocutaneous, suprascapular, and long thoracic nerves. Stimulation duration, number of stimulation attempts, average current, and total examination time were recorded. The differences in data between the two groups were compared and analyzed.
resultsGroup A demonstrated significantly lower stimulation duration (156.70±50.13 vs. 260.17±53.19 s), fewer stimulation attempts (17.73±3.94 vs. 25.80±5.23), and lower average current [32.45 (30.28, 40.13) vs. 42.75 (37.78,50.68) mA] compared to Group B (all P < 0.001). No significant difference was observed in total examination time (387.40 ± 33.72 vs. 372.00 ± 47.01 s; P = 0.150). DISCUSSION: Ultrasound guidance improves procedural precision and reduces the need for repeated stimulations and higher electrical intensities. These benefits are achieved without extending the total examination time, making it a feasible and patient-friendly approach for routine use in clinical neurophysiology.
conclusionUltrasound-guided nerve conduction studies of the brachial plexus enhance procedural efficiency and patient comfort compared to the blind method. Further large-scale studies are recommended to validate these findings and assess broader clinical applications.
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.