Cervical Spine Stenosis Causing Diaphragmatic Paralysis: A Case Study and Narrative Review of Clinical Presentations and Outcomes.
| Autor: | Lamb CD; Department of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, NY., Schupper AJ, Quinones A, Zhang JY, Steinberger J, Margetis K |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Clinical spine surgery [Clin Spine Surg] 2024 Jul 01; Vol. 37 (6), pp. 245-251. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Feb 29. |
| DOI: | 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001588 |
| Abstrakt: | Study Design: Case report and narrative review. Objective: To explore the therapeutic role of surgical and nonsurgical treatment of diaphragmatic paralysis secondary to spinal cord and nerve root compression. Summary of Background Data: Phrenic nerve dysfunction due to central or neuroforaminal stenosis is a rare yet unappreciated etiology of diaphragmatic paralysis and chronic dyspnea. Surgical spine decompression, diaphragmatic pacing, and intensive physiotherapy are potential treatment options with varying degrees of evidence. Methods: The case of a 70-year-old male with progressive dyspnea, reduced hemi-diaphragmatic excursion, and C3-C7 stenosis, who underwent a microscopic foraminotomy is discussed. Literature review (MEDLINE, PubMed, Google Scholar) identified 19 similar reports and discussed alternative treatments and outcomes. Results and Conclusions: Phrenic nerve root decompression and improvement in neuromonitoring signals were observed intraoperatively. The patient's postoperative course was uncomplicated, and after 15 months, he experienced significant symptomatic improvement and minor improvement in hemi-diaphragmatic paralysis and pulmonary function tests. All case reports of patients treated with spinal decompression showed symptomatic and/or functional improvement, while one of the 2 patients treated with physiotherapy showed improvement. More studies are needed to further describe the course and outcomes of these interventions, but early identification and spinal decompression can be an effective treatment. Ocebm Level of Evidence: Level-4. Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|