• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Clinical Anatomy of the Sacral Nerve Roots and Its Relevance to Their Reconstruction After Sacrectomy

R. Kaiser, A. Khadanovich, M. Benes, J. Reynolds, G. Mawhinney, H. Giele, D. Kachlik

. 2025 ; 96 (3) : 505-513. [pub] 20240812

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25009771

Grantová podpora
322218 Grantová Agentura, Univerzita Karlova

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: En bloc sacrectomy is associated with sacral root transection causing loss of urinary bladder, rectum, and sexual function. The aim of the study was to determine the position of the pudendal branches (sensorimotor) and pelvic splanchnic nerves (parasympathetic) on the sacral roots relative to the sacrum, and the minimal and maximal defects in the sacral roots that can be reconstructed by grafting after various types of sacrectomy. METHODS: Five cadaveric pelves were dissected bilaterally. The lengths and widths of the S1-S4 roots and their branches were measured. Then, the minimal and maximal defects between the proximal and distal stumps of the sacrificed roots were measured following 3 models of sacrectomy (below S2, below S1, and total sacrectomy). RESULTS: The mean distance of the splanchnic nerves from the S2 and S3 anterior sacral foramina was 17.7 ± 7.3 and 23.6 ± 11.1 mm, respectively, and the mean distance of the pudendal S2 and S3 branches was 36.8 ± 13.7 and 30.2 ± 10.8 mm, respectively. The mean widths of the S2 and S3 roots were 9.3 ± 1.9 and 5.4 ± 1.2 mm, respectively. The mean maximal defects in S2 and S3 roots after various types of sacrectomies were between 61.8 ± 16.3 and 100.7 ± 14.3 mm and between 62.7 ± 20.2 and 84.7 ± 25.1 mm, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between sides or sexes for all obtained measurements. CONCLUSION: The reconstruction of the S2-S3 roots is anatomically feasible after partial or total sacrectomies in which the resection of the soft tissue does not extend further than approximately 1.5 to 2 cm ventrally from the sacrum.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25009771
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250429134753.0
007      
ta
008      
250415s2025 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1227/neu.0000000000003135 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39132994
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Kaiser, Radek $u Department of Spinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford , UK $u Center for Endoscopic, Surgical and Clinical Anatomy (CESKA), Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000259859595 $7 xx0189785
245    10
$a Clinical Anatomy of the Sacral Nerve Roots and Its Relevance to Their Reconstruction After Sacrectomy / $c R. Kaiser, A. Khadanovich, M. Benes, J. Reynolds, G. Mawhinney, H. Giele, D. Kachlik
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: En bloc sacrectomy is associated with sacral root transection causing loss of urinary bladder, rectum, and sexual function. The aim of the study was to determine the position of the pudendal branches (sensorimotor) and pelvic splanchnic nerves (parasympathetic) on the sacral roots relative to the sacrum, and the minimal and maximal defects in the sacral roots that can be reconstructed by grafting after various types of sacrectomy. METHODS: Five cadaveric pelves were dissected bilaterally. The lengths and widths of the S1-S4 roots and their branches were measured. Then, the minimal and maximal defects between the proximal and distal stumps of the sacrificed roots were measured following 3 models of sacrectomy (below S2, below S1, and total sacrectomy). RESULTS: The mean distance of the splanchnic nerves from the S2 and S3 anterior sacral foramina was 17.7 ± 7.3 and 23.6 ± 11.1 mm, respectively, and the mean distance of the pudendal S2 and S3 branches was 36.8 ± 13.7 and 30.2 ± 10.8 mm, respectively. The mean widths of the S2 and S3 roots were 9.3 ± 1.9 and 5.4 ± 1.2 mm, respectively. The mean maximal defects in S2 and S3 roots after various types of sacrectomies were between 61.8 ± 16.3 and 100.7 ± 14.3 mm and between 62.7 ± 20.2 and 84.7 ± 25.1 mm, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between sides or sexes for all obtained measurements. CONCLUSION: The reconstruction of the S2-S3 roots is anatomically feasible after partial or total sacrectomies in which the resection of the soft tissue does not extend further than approximately 1.5 to 2 cm ventrally from the sacrum.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a křížová kost $x chirurgie $x anatomie a histologie $x inervace $7 D012447
650    12
$a míšní kořeny $x anatomie a histologie $x chirurgie $7 D013126
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    12
$a mrtvola $7 D002102
650    _2
$a zákroky plastické chirurgie $x metody $7 D019651
650    _2
$a splanchnické nervy $x anatomie a histologie $x chirurgie $7 D013153
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Khadanovich, Anhelina $u Center for Endoscopic, Surgical and Clinical Anatomy (CESKA), Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000191174193
700    1_
$a Benes, Michal $u Center for Endoscopic, Surgical and Clinical Anatomy (CESKA), Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000333262325
700    1_
$a Reynolds, Jeremy $u Department of Spinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford , UK
700    1_
$a Mawhinney, Gerard $u Department of Spinal Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford , UK $u Nuffield Department of Clinical Neuroscience, University of Oxford, Oxford , UK $1 https://orcid.org/0000000245956482
700    1_
$a Giele, Henk $u Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford , UK $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford , UK $1 https://orcid.org/0000000320175193
700    1_
$a Kachlik, David $u Center for Endoscopic, Surgical and Clinical Anatomy (CESKA), Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $u Department of Anatomy, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague , Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000281509663 $7 pna2008482481
773    0_
$w MED00003511 $t Neurosurgery $x 1524-4040 $g Roč. 96, č. 3 (2025), s. 505-513
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39132994 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250415 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250429134748 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2311259 $s 1246852
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2025 $b 96 $c 3 $d 505-513 $e 20240812 $i 1524-4040 $m Neurosurgery $n Neurosurgery $x MED00003511
GRA    __
$a 322218 $p Grantová Agentura, Univerzita Karlova
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250415

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace