Extreme variability of vascular responses to slightly different abduction angles during abduction and external rotation tests, in patients with suspected thoracic outlet syndrome.

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 BIOPHYSICS Physiological measurement Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1088/1361-6579/adc239
Simon Lecoq, Quentin Petit, Nathan Cronier, Samir Henni, Bénédicte Noury-Desvaux, Pierre Abraham
{"title":"Extreme variability of vascular responses to slightly different abduction angles during abduction and external rotation tests, in patients with suspected thoracic outlet syndrome.","authors":"Simon Lecoq, Quentin Petit, Nathan Cronier, Samir Henni, Bénédicte Noury-Desvaux, Pierre Abraham","doi":"10.1088/1361-6579/adc239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Patients may not always perform a perfect 90° upper limb abduction when doing an abduction, external rotation test for the evaluation of thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS). We aimed to study the vascular responses to three slightly different abduction angles.&#xD;Approach: We recorded fingertip arterial (A-PPG) and forearm venous (V-PPG) photo-plethysmography in 111 patients referred for suspicion or follow up of TOS. The measurements were made bilaterally during a 30 sec. surrender position, followed by moving elbows in the frontal plane without changing elbow and hand level to open the costo-clavicular angle (prayer position) to standardize venous results, either: slightly below (<90°), at the same level of (~90°), or slightly above (>90°) the shoulder level, in a random order. &#xD;Main results: With abnormal results defined as A-PPG < 5 %rest and V-PPG <70 %max in the surrender position, 54 of the 222 upper limbs were normal at all three tests. The proportion of abnormal tests decreased with the increase in abduction angle (Cochran Q < 0.05), 135 upper limbs showed impaired venous outflow for one (n=74), two (n=47) or the three angles (n=14) without arterial inflow impairment at any of the three tests.&#xD;Significance: Slight changes from a \"perfect\" 90° abduction angle gave unreliable results during elevation, abduction, external rotation stress tests. A venous outflow impairment should probably be considered a physiologic response at <90° abduction. &#xD.</p>","PeriodicalId":20047,"journal":{"name":"Physiological measurement","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiological measurement","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6579/adc239","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Patients may not always perform a perfect 90° upper limb abduction when doing an abduction, external rotation test for the evaluation of thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS). We aimed to study the vascular responses to three slightly different abduction angles. Approach: We recorded fingertip arterial (A-PPG) and forearm venous (V-PPG) photo-plethysmography in 111 patients referred for suspicion or follow up of TOS. The measurements were made bilaterally during a 30 sec. surrender position, followed by moving elbows in the frontal plane without changing elbow and hand level to open the costo-clavicular angle (prayer position) to standardize venous results, either: slightly below (<90°), at the same level of (~90°), or slightly above (>90°) the shoulder level, in a random order. Main results: With abnormal results defined as A-PPG < 5 %rest and V-PPG <70 %max in the surrender position, 54 of the 222 upper limbs were normal at all three tests. The proportion of abnormal tests decreased with the increase in abduction angle (Cochran Q < 0.05), 135 upper limbs showed impaired venous outflow for one (n=74), two (n=47) or the three angles (n=14) without arterial inflow impairment at any of the three tests. Significance: Slight changes from a "perfect" 90° abduction angle gave unreliable results during elevation, abduction, external rotation stress tests. A venous outflow impairment should probably be considered a physiologic response at <90° abduction. .

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Physiological measurement
Physiological measurement 生物-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
9.40%
发文量
124
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Physiological Measurement publishes papers about the quantitative assessment and visualization of physiological function in clinical research and practice, with an emphasis on the development of new methods of measurement and their validation. Papers are published on topics including: applied physiology in illness and health electrical bioimpedance, optical and acoustic measurement techniques advanced methods of time series and other data analysis biomedical and clinical engineering in-patient and ambulatory monitoring point-of-care technologies novel clinical measurements of cardiovascular, neurological, and musculoskeletal systems. measurements in molecular, cellular and organ physiology and electrophysiology physiological modeling and simulation novel biomedical sensors, instruments, devices and systems measurement standards and guidelines.
期刊最新文献
Accelerometer-based estimation of respiratory rate using principal component analysis and autocorrelation. Extreme variability of vascular responses to slightly different abduction angles during abduction and external rotation tests, in patients with suspected thoracic outlet syndrome. Noninvasive assessment of temporal dynamics in sympathetic and parasympathetic baroreflex responses. The MSPTDfast photoplethysmography beat detection algorithm: design, benchmarking, and open-source distribution. Enhancing the precision of impedance measurement from 5 kHz to 1 MHz through self-identification of parasitic parameters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1