Familial predisposition of thoracic outlet syndrome:does a familial syndrome exist? Report of cases and review of literature

Introduction: Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (NTOS) is caused by compression of the brachial plexus. The clinical presentation of NTOS is characterized by symptoms of pain, paresthesia, numbness or muscle weakness in the neck, arm or hand. Methods: In this case report, five patients were diagnosed with NTOS. They all had a first degree relative with NTOS as well. Conlusions: These cases show familial predisposition in thoracic outlet syndrome. Could a form of familial TOS exist?

Surgical approaches for thoracic outlet decompression in the treatment of thoracic outlet syndrome

Thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) is a controversial and uncommon syndrome. Three different diagnoses can be made based on the compressed structure: arterial TOS, venous TOS, and neurogenic TOS. Diagnosing TOS, especially neurogenic TOS, remains difficult since a single diagnostic tool does not exist. Although this resulted in a lot of confusion, standardization of care and outcome improved daily care practice measures in the last decade. Current treatment algorithms consist of both conservative and surgical treatment approaches, which should be chosen depending on the type of TOS and extend of the complaints. Surgical treatment of TOS is performed via thoracic outlet decompression (TOD). TOD surgery includes complete resection of the first rib (cartilage to cartilage), transection of the scalene muscles and complete neurolysis/venolysis or arteriolysis. Four different approaches can be chosen for TOD surgery: the transaxillary (TA), supraclavicular (SC), paraclavicular (PC), and infraclavicular (IC) approach. The TA, SC, and PC approach can be used for every form of TOS. However, the PC approach is mostly used for treating venous TOS. The IC approach has no role in treating neurogenic or arterial TOS and is only used for venous TOS. Every approach has its own benefits and limitations and literature does not agree on what approach is best. Therefore, the used surgical approach for TOD should be based on the surgeon\u27s preference and experience. The aim of this review is to present an overview of the diagnostic pathway and provide an in-depth description of the surgical approach in each form of TOS

Frailty as a predictor of mortality in the elderly emergency general surgery patient

Background: The number of surgical procedures performed in elderly and frail patients has greatly increased in the last decades. However, there is little research in the elderly emergency general surgery patient. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of frailty in the emergency general surgery population in Belgium. Secondly, we examined the length of hospital stay, readmission rate and mortality at 30 and 90 days. Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study at Ghent University Hospital. All patients older than 65 admitted to a general surgery ward from the emergency department were eligible for inclusion. Primary endpoint was mortality at 30 days. Secondary outcomes were mortality at 90 days, readmissions and length of stay. Cross-sectional observations were performed using the Fisher exact test, Mann-Whitney U-test, or one-way ANOVA. We performed a COX multivariable analysis to identify independent variables associated with mortality at 30 and 90 days as well as the readmission risk. Results: Data were collected from 98 patients in a four-month period. 23.5% of patients were deemed frail. 79% of all patients underwent abdominal surgery. Univariate analyses showed that polypharmacy, multimorbidity, a history of falls, hearing impairment and urinary incontinence were statistically significantly different between the non-frail and the group. Frail patients showed a higher incidence for mortality within 30 days (9% versus 1.3% (p = .053)). There were no differences between the two groups for mortality at 90 days, readmission, length of stay and operation. Frailty was a predictor for mortality at 90 days (p = .025) (hazard ratio (HR) 10.83 (95% CI 1.34-87.4)). Operation (p = .084) (HR 0.16 (95% CI 0.16-1.29)) and the presence of chronic cardiac failure (p = .049) (HR 0.38 (95% CI 0.14-0.99)) were protective for mortality at 90 days. Conclusion: Frailty is a significant predictor for mortality for elderly patients undergoing emergency abdominal/general surgery

Thoracic Outlet decompression Surgery for Gilliatt-Sumner Hand as presentation of neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome

INTRODUCTION: Chronic compression of the inferior trunk of the brachial plexus can result in severe pain and progressive atrophy and weakness of the musculature of the forearm and hand, known as Gilliatt-Sumner Hand (GSH). The objective of treatment in these patients is to stop further atrophy and pain. Restoration of motor function is thought to be seldom achieved. The aim of this contemporary case series is to describe diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of surgery in GSH. METHODS: All patients referred between January 2017 and May 2021 with visible signs of a GSH were included. Visible GSH signs were defined as muscle atrophy of the abductor digiti minimi (ADM), abductor pollicis brevis (APB), and/or interosseous musculature. Additional electrodiagnostic assessment (EDx) and high-resolution ultrasound (HRUS) were performed in all patients. All diagnosed GSH patients underwent thoracic outlet decompression (TOD) surgery by transaxillary (TA) or supraclavicular (SC) approach. Outcomes were measured with the TOS disability scale, Cervical Brachial Score Questionnaire (CBSQ), Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score and patient reported outcome of motor function, measured with a numerated rating scale score (NRS). The standardized Elevated Arm Stress Test (sEAST) was used to assess motor function before and after TOD. RESULTS: Twenty patients were referred to our center with visible signs of a GSH. Clinical examination showed atrophy of the ADM, APB and interosseous musculature in all patients. EDx showed plexopathy of the lower brachial plexus in all patients. HRUS showed an indented inferior trunc of the brachial plexus (so called "wedge sickle sign" WSS) in 18 (90%) patients. Surgical treatment was performed in 17 patients (15 TA-TOD, 2 SC TOD). Three patients refrained from surgical treatment. The median follow-up interval was 15.0 (IQR 14.0) months. The TOS disability scale improved significant (Preoperative: mean 6.31, CI [5.49 - 7.13]; postoperative: mean 4.25, CI [2.80 - 5.70], p=0.026). The same was seen for the CBSQ scores (preoperative mean 77.75, CI [66.63 - 88.87]; postoperative mean 42.65, CI [24.77 - 60.77], p= 0.001) and DASH scores (preoperative mean 59.13, CI [51.49 - 66.77]; postoperative mean 40.96, CI [24.41 - 57.51]; p= 0.032. The NRS for muscle weakness and sEAST showed no statistical difference before and after TOD comparing the whole group (NRS muscle weakness preoperative mean: 6.22, CI [4.31 - 8.14]; postoperative mean: 5.11, CI [3.25 - 6.97]; p= 0.269). However, 4 (23.52%) patients had a 50% or more decrease in NRS for muscle weakness and a minimum increase of 20% in total and average force on the sEAST measurement. The NRS for numbness showed a statistically significant decrease for the whole group (preoperative mean: 5.67, CI [4.18 - 7.16]; postoperative mean: 3.33 [1.37-5.29]; p=0.029). CONCLUSION: A combination of physical examination, EDx and HRUS studies can differentiate GSH from differential diagnoses. HRUS appears has the advantage over EDx studies in confirming GSH by visualization of compression of the brachial plexus. TOD surgery will stop the progressive muscle atrophy and significantly reduce NTOS complaints and in some patients, motor function will recover

Interfascial Plane Blocks Reduce Postoperative Pain and Morphine Consumption in Thoracic Outlet Decompression

Background: Postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing transaxillary thoracic outlet decompression (TATOD) is challenging because of the invasive surgery, the complex innervation of the axillary region, and the preoperative use of opioids by many patients. Commonly, postoperative pain is managed with additional opioids that introduce well-known sideeffects. To investigate the analgesic efficacy of 2 novel regional anesthesia techniques, we performed a retrospective study comparing the combined pectoral block type 1 and erector spinae block (PECS 1 + ESB) and the pectoral block type 2 (PECS 2) and systemic intravenous opioids regimen (no block) in patients undergoing TATOD. Materials and methods: We performed 10 PECS 1 + ESB and 10 PECS 2 blocks in patients undergoing TATOD. Twenty patients were randomly selected as controls. The primary endpoint was pain. Secondary endpoints were opioid use, nausea, and vomiting. Results: Postoperative maximal numeric rating scale scores on recovery were significantly lower in patients receiving either a PECS 1 + ESB or a PECS 2 block compared with controls without block (no block: median 6.00, interquartile range [IQR] 3.00; PECS 1 + ESB: median 4.50, IQR 4.00; PECS 2: median 4.00, IQR 5.00; P = 0.031). Postoperative intravenous morphine consumption was 43% lower in the PECS 1 + ESB group and 56% lower in the PECS 2 group compared with the group with no block (oral morphine equivalents; no block: mean 16.05 ± SD 6.79 mg; PECS 1 + ESB mean 9.05 ± SD 6.24 mg; PECS 2: mean 7.00 ± SD 6.16; P = 0.03 and P = 0.003, respectively). There was no statistical difference in both nausea and vomitus (no block 45% nausea and 30% vomitus, PECS 1 + ESB 40% nausea and 20% vomitus, PECS 2 10% nausea and 0% vomitus, P = 0.17 and P = 0.14, respectively). Conclusions: There was a significant reduction in postoperative pain and opioid consumption for patients treated with either the PECS 1 + ESB block or PECS 2

Surgery versus continued conservative treatment for neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome:the first randomised clinical trial (STOPNTOS-trial)

OBJECTIVES: Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (NTOS) is one of the most controversial clinical entities in medicine. Several major case series have shown promising results of surgery, however solid scientific evidence is lacking. The aim of this trial was to objectify the effect of thoracic outlet decompression (TOD). DESIGN: Randomised controlled clinical trial METHODS: We conducted a single center (high volume, tertiary TOS center), non-blinded, randomized controlled trial with parallel group design. Patients with a diagnosis of NTOS refractory to conservative therapy were randomized into one of two intervention arms and either received a trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression (TA-TOD) or continued conservative treatment. After 3 months, the conservative treated group was also offered a TA-TOD. Primary outcome was the change in Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, (DASH) questionnaire score. Secondary outcomes were the change in Cervical-Brachial Symptoms Questionnaire (CBSQ), TOS disability scale and quality of life scores. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3, 6 and 12 months after inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 50 patients were enrolled in this trial: 25 in the TA-TOD group and 25 in the continued conservative treatment group. Follow up was completed in 24 and 22 patients respectively. At 3 months, there was a significant difference in DASH scores (TA-TOD: mean: 45.15; confidence interval (CI) [38.08 - 52.21]; conservative treatment: mean 64.92, CI [57.54 -72.30]; p<.001). All patients in the conservative treatment group applied for surgery 3 months after randomization. After surgery of the conservative treatment group, there was no significant difference between the groups for all primary and secondary outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: TA-TOD for NTOS is effective in patients that do not respond to conservative treatment. TRIAL REGISTER NUMBER: NL63986.100.17

Interpectoral-pectoserratus plane (PECS II) block in patients undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery; A prospective double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate if an interpectoral-pectoserratus plane (PECS II) block decreases postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting and improves quality of recovery in patients with neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (NTOS) undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery. DESIGN: A prospective single center double blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Perioperative period; operating room, post anesthesia care unit (PACU) and hospital ward. PATIENTS: Seventy patients with NTOS, undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to an interventional arm, receiving the block with 40 ml ropivacaine 0.5% (concentration was adjusted if the patient's weight was <66 kg), and a placebo group, receiving a sham block with 40 ml NaCl 0.9%. The interpectoral-pectoserratus plane block was performed ultrasound guided; the first injection below the pectoral minor muscle and the second below the pectoral major muscle. The hospitals' pharmacist prepared the study medication and was the only person able to see the randomization result. The study was blinded for patients, researchers and medical personnel. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome parameters were postoperative pain, measured by numeric rating scale on the PACU (start and end) and on the ward on postoperative day (POD) 0 and 1, and postoperative morphine consumption, measured on the PACU and on the ward during the first 24 h. Secondary outcome parameters were postoperative nausea and vomiting, and quality of recovery. MAIN RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in NRS on the PACU at the start (ropivacaine 4.9 ± 3.2 vs placebo 6.2 ± 3.0, p = .07), at the end (ropivacaine 4.0 ± 1.7 vs placebo 3.9 ± 1.7, p = .77), on the ward on POD 0 (ropivacaine 4.6 ± 2.0 vs placebo 4.6 ± 2.0, p = 1.00) or POD 1 (ropivacaine 3.9 ± 1.8 vs placebo 3.6 ± 2.0, p = .53). There was no difference in postoperative morphine consumption at the PACU (ropivacaine 11.0 mg ± 6.5 vs placebo 10.8 mg ± 4.8, p = .91) or on the ward (ropivacaine 11.6 mg ± 8.5 vs placebo 9.6 mg ± 9.4, p = .39). CONCLUSIONS: The interpectoral-pectoserratus plane block is not effective for postoperative analgesia in patients with NTOS undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery

Interpectoral-pectoserratus plane (PECS II) block in patients undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery; A prospective double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate if an interpectoral-pectoserratus plane (PECS II) block decreases postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting and improves quality of recovery in patients with neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (NTOS) undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery. DESIGN: A prospective single center double blinded randomized placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Perioperative period; operating room, post anesthesia care unit (PACU) and hospital ward. PATIENTS: Seventy patients with NTOS, undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to an interventional arm, receiving the block with 40 ml ropivacaine 0.5% (concentration was adjusted if the patient's weight was <66 kg), and a placebo group, receiving a sham block with 40 ml NaCl 0.9%. The interpectoral-pectoserratus plane block was performed ultrasound guided; the first injection below the pectoral minor muscle and the second below the pectoral major muscle. The hospitals' pharmacist prepared the study medication and was the only person able to see the randomization result. The study was blinded for patients, researchers and medical personnel. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome parameters were postoperative pain, measured by numeric rating scale on the PACU (start and end) and on the ward on postoperative day (POD) 0 and 1, and postoperative morphine consumption, measured on the PACU and on the ward during the first 24 h. Secondary outcome parameters were postoperative nausea and vomiting, and quality of recovery. MAIN RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in NRS on the PACU at the start (ropivacaine 4.9 ± 3.2 vs placebo 6.2 ± 3.0, p = .07), at the end (ropivacaine 4.0 ± 1.7 vs placebo 3.9 ± 1.7, p = .77), on the ward on POD 0 (ropivacaine 4.6 ± 2.0 vs placebo 4.6 ± 2.0, p = 1.00) or POD 1 (ropivacaine 3.9 ± 1.8 vs placebo 3.6 ± 2.0, p = .53). There was no difference in postoperative morphine consumption at the PACU (ropivacaine 11.0 mg ± 6.5 vs placebo 10.8 mg ± 4.8, p = .91) or on the ward (ropivacaine 11.6 mg ± 8.5 vs placebo 9.6 mg ± 9.4, p = .39). CONCLUSIONS: The interpectoral-pectoserratus plane block is not effective for postoperative analgesia in patients with NTOS undergoing trans-axillary thoracic outlet decompression surgery