HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Miller, J. I. Articles by Apple, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Miller, J. I. Articles by Apple, D.

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol 99, 35-39, Copyright © 1990 by The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Western Thoracic Surgical Association

ARTICLES

Phrenic nerve pacing of the quadriplegic patient

JI Miller, JA Farmer, W Stuart and D Apple
Joseph B. Whitehead Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Ga.

Phrenic nerve pacing can be used to free a quadriplegic patient from ventilatory dependency. During a 6-year period (1982 to 1988), 23 patients with an age range of 17 to 63 years (mean 31 years) underwent implantation of a phrenic nerve pacemaker because of ventilatory dependency resulting from quadriplegia. Fourteen patients had a unilateral phrenic nerve implant and nine had a bilateral implant. The time from injury to implantation was 12 to 16 weeks. The site of implantation was the cervical phrenic nerve in 13 patients and the thoracic phrenic nerve in 10 patients. During the past 24 months, only a transthoracic approach has been used. The indication for pacing was failure to be weaned from ventilatory support in all patients. Failure to stimulate the phrenic nerve at implantation was noted in three patients, despite preoperative testing indicating an acceptable response. There were no deaths, and minor complications developed in three patients. Follow-up is available in all patients: Eight patients are completely free from the ventilator; nine patients are in markedly improved condition but require the ventilator at night; three patients are in moderately improved condition; and three patients had no response. Three patients required reexploration for component failure from 6 weeks to 18 months after implantation.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. A. Morgan, D. L. Morales, R. John, M. E. Ginsburg, A. R. Kherani, D. W. Vigilance, F. H. Cheema, C. R. Smith Jr, M. C. Oz, and M. Argenziano Endoscopic, robotically assisted implantation of phrenic pacemakers J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., August 1, 2003; 126(2): 582 - 583. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Morgan, M. E. Ginsburg, J. R. Sonett, D. L.S. Morales, T. Kohmoto, L. A. Gorenstein, C. R. Smith, and M. Argenziano Advanced thoracoscopic procedures are facilitated by computer-aided robotic technology Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., June 1, 2003; 23(6): 883 - 887. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Elefteriades and J. A. Quin Diaphragm pacing Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2002; 73(2): 691 - 692. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. F. DiMARCO, J. R. ROMANIUK, K. E. KOWALSKI, and G. S. SUPINSKI Efficacy of Combined Inspiratory Intercostal and Expiratory Muscle Pacing to Maintain Artificial Ventilation Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 1, 1997; 156(1): 122 - 126. [Abstract] [Full Text]