ReviewBrazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology2026
Speaking the same anatomical language: standardizing laryngeal nerve terminology matters in anatomy and medicine.
Review in Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to identify the most appropriate terminology for the nerve commonly referred to as the "recurrent laryngeal nerve" or "inferior laryngeal nerve", based on official anatomical nomenclatures. Additionally, it sought to analyze the frequency of use of these terms in scientific literature and provide a detailed anatomical description of the nerve to promote terminological accuracy in academic and clinical settings.
methodsA descriptive analysis was conducted in three phases. First, a literature search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, LILACS, SciELO, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, alongside a review of major anatomical textbooks, to quantify the usage of both terms. Second, theTerminologia Anatomica (TA) and Terminologia Neuroanatomica (TNA) were consulted to identify the officially sanctioned term. Third, a comprehensive description of the nerve's anatomy, function, and clinical significance was compiled from authoritative sources.
resultsThe term "recurrent laryngeal nerve" was overwhelmingly predominant in all searched scientific databases and modern anatomical textbooks. For instance, MEDLINE/PubMed yielded 1,828 articles using this term in the title, compared to only 111 for "inferior laryngeal nerve". Both the TA and TNA exclusively recognize "N. laryngeus recurrens", translated as "recurrent laryngeal nerve", as the official designation. The term "inferior laryngeal" in current nomenclatures is reserved for vascular structures, namely the inferior laryngeal artery and vein.
conclusionThe correct and internationally accepted term is "recurrent laryngeal nerve". The consistent use of standardized terminology is crucial for precise communication in education, clinical practice, and research. A thorough understanding of the recurrent laryngeal nerve's anatomical course and variations is essential for minimizing the risk of iatrogenic injury during surgical procedures in the neck, particularly thyroid and parathyroid surgeries.
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.