British journal of neurosurgery · 2016
Variations of the accessory nerve: anatomical study including previously undocumented findings-expanding our misunderstanding of this nerve.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tubbs R Shane, Ajayi Olaide O, Fries Fabian N, Spinner Robert J, Oskouian Rod J
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The anatomy of the accessory nerve has been well described but continued new clinical and anatomical findings exemplify our lack of a full understanding of the course of this nerve. Therefore, this study aimed to expand on our knowledge of the course of the 11th cranial nerve via anatomical dissections.
METHODS: Fifty-six cadavers (112 sides) underwent dissection of the accessory nerve from its cranial and spinal origins to its emergence into the posterior cervical triangle. Immunohistochemistry was performed when appropriate.
RESULTS: Our findings included two cases (1.8%) where the nerve was duplicated, one intracranially and one extracranially. One accessory nerve (0.9%) was found to enter its own dural compartment within the jugular foramen. The majority of sides (80%) were found to have a cranial root of the accessory nerve. Thirty-one sides (28%) had connections to cervical dorsal roots medially and three sides (2.7%) laterally. Medial connections were most common with the C1 nerve. Medial components of these dorsal root connections were all sensory in nature. However, lateral components were motor on two sides (1.8%). Nerves traveled anterior to the internal jugular vein on 88% of sides. One (0.9%) left side nerve joined an interneural anastomosis between the dorsal rootlets. Macroganglia were found on the spinal part of the intracranial nerve on 13% of sides. The lesser occipital nerve arose directly from the accessory nerve on two sides (1.8%) and communicated with the accessory nerve on 5.4% of sides. One side (0.9%) was found to communicate with the facial nerve with both nerves innervating the sternocleidomastoid muscle.
CONCLUSIONS: Additional anatomical knowledge of the variants of the accessory nerve may benefit patient care when this nerve is pathologically involved.
METHODS: Fifty-six cadavers (112 sides) underwent dissection of the accessory nerve from its cranial and spinal origins to its emergence into the posterior cervical triangle. Immunohistochemistry was performed when appropriate.
RESULTS: Our findings included two cases (1.8%) where the nerve was duplicated, one intracranially and one extracranially. One accessory nerve (0.9%) was found to enter its own dural compartment within the jugular foramen. The majority of sides (80%) were found to have a cranial root of the accessory nerve. Thirty-one sides (28%) had connections to cervical dorsal roots medially and three sides (2.7%) laterally. Medial connections were most common with the C1 nerve. Medial components of these dorsal root connections were all sensory in nature. However, lateral components were motor on two sides (1.8%). Nerves traveled anterior to the internal jugular vein on 88% of sides. One (0.9%) left side nerve joined an interneural anastomosis between the dorsal rootlets. Macroganglia were found on the spinal part of the intracranial nerve on 13% of sides. The lesser occipital nerve arose directly from the accessory nerve on two sides (1.8%) and communicated with the accessory nerve on 5.4% of sides. One side (0.9%) was found to communicate with the facial nerve with both nerves innervating the sternocleidomastoid muscle.
CONCLUSIONS: Additional anatomical knowledge of the variants of the accessory nerve may benefit patient care when this nerve is pathologically involved.