ArticleClinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.)2026
The Impact of Shoulder Abduction on the Anatomy of the Interscalene Triangle.
Article in Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 2026. 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.
- The Impact of Shoulder Abduction on the Anatomy of the Interscalene Triangle.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) occurs in three major anatomical locations, including the interscalene triangle. Because symptoms of TOS are reproduced on upper limb abduction, this study aimed to examine the impact of glenohumeral abduction on the triangle's dimensions and whether this may contribute to compression of the structures which traverse it. Ten interscalene triangles were dissected from five body donor specimens bilaterally to measure the length of the anterior and middle scalene muscles, and inferior border of the scalene triangle when the upper limb was abducted to 0°, 90°, and at maximal abduction. Both the anterior and middle scalene lengths decreased as the angle of abduction increased, with the greatest decrease being between 0° and 90° (p = 0.0003). No significant decrease in length was shown between 90° and > 90° abduction (p = 0.48) nor was there a significant change in the overall area of the triangle throughout abduction (p = 0.58). This suggests that TOS symptoms may not correlate with the degree of upper limb abduction as previously thought. Additionally, there were significant differences between parameters of the superficial triangle measured by most previous studies, and a deeper triangle within the same space at all levels of abduction. This study therefore recommends further exploration into the dynamic nature of the interscalene triangle.
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.