Funktionsstörungen des Musculus trapezius, des Plexus cervicalis und der Schulter nach Neck dissection

Einleitung Funktionsstörungen der Schulter treten mit unterschiedlicher Häufigkeit nach Neck dissection auf. Die durchgeführten Studien untersuchten den Einfluss einer Trapeziusparese und einer Schädigung des Plexus cervicalis auf die Entstehung einer Schulterfunktionsstörung. Hierzu sollten neue Methoden zur Bewertung der Aktivität des Musculus trapezius entwickelt werden. Die genauen Auswirkungen auf die Lebenssituation des Patienten waren bisher unklar. Methode Zur Bewertung der Trapeziusfunktion wurde eine simultane Oberflächenlelektromyographie und Schulterhebekraftmessung durchgeführt. In Vorversuchen erfolgte die Entwicklung des Versuchsaufbaus. Wir verwendeten eine bipolare Ableitung des oberen und unteren Trapeziusanteils und eine isometrische Schulterhebekraftmessung bei 90° Abduktion. Es wurden frequenz- und amplitudenabhängige Merkmale bei rampenförmig ansteigender Schulterhebekraft berechnet (Root Mean Square, Mean Frequency, Mean Power Frequency, Frequenzverhältnis und Turnanalyse nach Willison). Die Datenanalyse erfolgte unter LabVIEW(r). Die Funktion des Plexus cervicalis wurde anhand einer semiquantitativen Erfassung der Oberflächensensibilität festgestellt. Die Auswirkung der Schulterfunktionsstörung auf die Lebenssituation des Patienten wurde mittels des Constant Murley Scores eingeschätzt. Ergebnisse Die erste Studie beinhaltete 90 Probanden und zeigte einen statistisch signifikanten Anstieg (pIntroduction Functional shoulder disorders after neck dissection have different incidences. The following studies investigated the influence of a trapezius muscle palsy and a damage of the cervical plexus on the frequency of painful shoulder complaints. The consequences for shoulder function and for daily life activities were not yet clear. Methods For assessment of the trapezius function a simultaneous surface electromyography and force measurement were performed. We used a bipolar electrode configuration and an increasing isometric contraction in 90° arm abduction. Frequency and amplitude based parameters (Root Mean Square, Mean Frequency, Mean Power Frequency, Frequency Ratio, Turn Analysis of Willison) were computed and analysed in LabVIEW(r). The cervical plexus function was determined by semiquantitative measurement of the cutaneous sensibility. Shoulder function and restriction in daily life activities were assessed by the Constant Murley Score. Results The first group included 90 probands and showed a statistical significant (

Consensus Statement on Bone Conduction Devices and Active Middle Ear Implants in Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss

Nowadays, several options are available to treat patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. Whenever surgical intervention is not possible or contra-indicated, and amplification by a conventional hearing device (e.g., behind-the-ear device) is not feasible, then implantable hearing devices are an indispensable next option. Implantable bone-conduction devices and middle-ear implants have advantages but also limitations concerning complexity/invasiveness of the surgery, medical complications, and effectiveness. To counsel the patient, the clinician should have a good overview of the options with regard to safety and reliability as well as unequivocal technical performance data. The present consensus document is the outcome of an extensive iterative process including ENT specialists, audiologists, health-policy scientists, and representatives/technicians of the main companies in this field. This document should provide a first framework for procedures and technical characterization to enhance effective communication between these stakeholders, improving health care

Consensus Statement on Bone Conduction Devices and Active Middle Ear Implants in Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss

Contains fulltext : 250636.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access

Consensus Statement on Bone Conduction Devices and Active Middle Ear Implants in Conductive and Mixed Hearing Loss.

Nowadays, several options are available to treat patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss. Whenever surgical intervention is not possible or contra-indicated, and amplification by a conventional hearing device (e.g., behind-the-ear device) is not feasible, then implantable hearing devices are an indispensable next option. Implantable bone-conduction devices and middle-ear implants have advantages but also limitations concerning complexity/invasiveness of the surgery, medical complications, and effectiveness. To counsel the patient, the clinician should have a good overview of the options with regard to safety and reliability as well as unequivocal technical performance data. The present consensus document is the outcome of an extensive iterative process including ENT specialists, audiologists, health-policy scientists, and representatives/technicians of the main companies in this field. This document should provide a first framework for procedures and technical characterization to enhance effective communication between these stakeholders, improving health care