Anthropometric Measures, Recurrent Laryngeal Nerves Diameter, Electromyographic Responses and Vocal Cord Paralysis Risk
(2025) In Head and Neck 47(11). p.3123-3130- Abstract
Objectives: To examine (1) the relationship between anthropometric measurements and recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) diameter; (2) whether thin RLNs have different baseline electromyographic (EMG) characteristics; (3) if thin or branched morphology is associated with increased risk of EMG adverse events, loss of signal (LOS) or vocal cord paresis/paralysis (VCP). Methods: In this prospective study, anthropometric data were collected, including weight, height, body mass index (BMI), neck circumference, shoulder diameter, and circumference of the right middle finger (RMF) or right ring finger (RRF). Results: We enrolled 216 patients who underwent surgery from 2016 to 2020 with 307 RLNs at risk. Thin nerves were defined as those ≤ 1.5 mm in... (More)
Objectives: To examine (1) the relationship between anthropometric measurements and recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) diameter; (2) whether thin RLNs have different baseline electromyographic (EMG) characteristics; (3) if thin or branched morphology is associated with increased risk of EMG adverse events, loss of signal (LOS) or vocal cord paresis/paralysis (VCP). Methods: In this prospective study, anthropometric data were collected, including weight, height, body mass index (BMI), neck circumference, shoulder diameter, and circumference of the right middle finger (RMF) or right ring finger (RRF). Results: We enrolled 216 patients who underwent surgery from 2016 to 2020 with 307 RLNs at risk. Thin nerves were defined as those ≤ 1.5 mm in diameter. The mean RLN diameter was 2 mm; the RLN was thinner in females and in patients with BMI < 20 kg/m2, body weight < 120 kg, height < 175 cm, neck circumference < 40 cm, shoulder diameter < 50 cm, and RMF or RRF < 7.6 cm (all p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were detected in baseline EMG characteristics between thin and thick RLNs bilaterally (except for right RLN R2 latency). We had zero cases of LOS or VCP. In all branched nerves, motor fibers resided in the anterior branch. Conclusion: Multiple anthropometric factors were associated with RLN diameter. Most of the studied EMG signal characteristics did not statistically differ by RLN diameter. With zero events of LOS or VCP, our study is not powered to determine if thin diameter or branching are independent risk factors for RLN injury in a high-volume endocrine surgery practice utilizing IONM.
(Less)
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-07-03
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- anthropometric, diameter, intraoperative nerve monitoring, recurrent laryngeal nerve, thyroid surgery, vocal cord paralysis
- in
- Head and Neck
- volume
- 47
- issue
- 11
- pages
- 8 pages
- publisher
- John Wiley & Sons Inc.
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:105009906195
- pmid:40611608
- ISSN
- 1043-3074
- DOI
- 10.1002/hed.28236
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- additional info
- Publisher Copyright: © 2025 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
- id
- a020c4fd-f713-452f-8c1e-852bc6579e85
- date added to LUP
- 2026-01-27 16:46:21
- date last changed
- 2026-01-28 14:05:23
@article{a020c4fd-f713-452f-8c1e-852bc6579e85,
abstract = {{<p>Objectives: To examine (1) the relationship between anthropometric measurements and recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) diameter; (2) whether thin RLNs have different baseline electromyographic (EMG) characteristics; (3) if thin or branched morphology is associated with increased risk of EMG adverse events, loss of signal (LOS) or vocal cord paresis/paralysis (VCP). Methods: In this prospective study, anthropometric data were collected, including weight, height, body mass index (BMI), neck circumference, shoulder diameter, and circumference of the right middle finger (RMF) or right ring finger (RRF). Results: We enrolled 216 patients who underwent surgery from 2016 to 2020 with 307 RLNs at risk. Thin nerves were defined as those ≤ 1.5 mm in diameter. The mean RLN diameter was 2 mm; the RLN was thinner in females and in patients with BMI < 20 kg/m<sup>2</sup>, body weight < 120 kg, height < 175 cm, neck circumference < 40 cm, shoulder diameter < 50 cm, and RMF or RRF < 7.6 cm (all p < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were detected in baseline EMG characteristics between thin and thick RLNs bilaterally (except for right RLN R2 latency). We had zero cases of LOS or VCP. In all branched nerves, motor fibers resided in the anterior branch. Conclusion: Multiple anthropometric factors were associated with RLN diameter. Most of the studied EMG signal characteristics did not statistically differ by RLN diameter. With zero events of LOS or VCP, our study is not powered to determine if thin diameter or branching are independent risk factors for RLN injury in a high-volume endocrine surgery practice utilizing IONM.</p>}},
author = {{Wang, Bo and Abdelhamid Ahmed, Amr H. and Cheung, Anthony Y. and Okose, Okenwa C. and McIlroy, Dioan and Iwata, Ayaka J. and Behr, Ian J. and Kamani, Dipti and Dralle, Henning and Crumley, Roger L. and Liddy, Whitney and Karcioglu, Amanda Silver and Kandil, Emad and Schneider, Rick and Wu, Che Wei and Lorenz, Kerstin and Almquist, Martin and Brauckhoff, Katrin and Volpi, Erivelto M. and Rangel, Leonardo and Tolley, Neil and Freeman, Jeremy and McMullen, Caitlin and Kroeker, Teresa and Barczynski, Marcin and Saito, Yoshiyuki and Takami, Hiroshi and Dionigi, Gianlorenzo and Kyriazidis, Natalia and Russell, Marika D. and Zhao, Wen Xin and Randolph, Gregory W.}},
issn = {{1043-3074}},
keywords = {{anthropometric; diameter; intraoperative nerve monitoring; recurrent laryngeal nerve; thyroid surgery; vocal cord paralysis}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{07}},
number = {{11}},
pages = {{3123--3130}},
publisher = {{John Wiley & Sons Inc.}},
series = {{Head and Neck}},
title = {{Anthropometric Measures, Recurrent Laryngeal Nerves Diameter, Electromyographic Responses and Vocal Cord Paralysis Risk}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.28236}},
doi = {{10.1002/hed.28236}},
volume = {{47}},
year = {{2025}},
}