The Experts below are selected from a list of 303 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Julie A. Freischlag - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Art of Caring in the Treatment of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Diagnostics (Basel Switzerland), 2018Co-Authors: Julie A. FreischlagAbstract:Those who diagnose and treat patients with Thoracic Outlet Syndrome, especially those patientswith neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome, have a practice, which needs to include many modalities todiagnose, treat, and intervene to improve their quality of life for the present and for the future.[...]
-
Venous Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Current Management of Venous Diseases, 2017Co-Authors: Kristine C Orion, Julie A. FreischlagAbstract:Venous Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (vTOS) involves the mechanical compression of the axillo-subclavian vein between the subclavius muscle, first Thoracic rib, and clavicle. Rarely, underlying hypercoagulable states may be present. Repetitive upper-extremity motion or trauma is common, and therefore this disease affects the adolescent and young patients. Unlike neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome, vTOS is routinely diagnosed with duplex ultrasound and clinical correlation. After initial anticoagulation with or without thrombolysis, the definitive treatment is surgical decompression followed by venogram and endovascular balloon venoplasty as needed. There have been excellent outcomes in the last two decades.
-
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome - Thoracic Outlet Syndrome.
The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology, 2015Co-Authors: Karl A. Illig, Robert W. Thompson, Julie A. Freischlag, Dean M. Donahue, Sheldon E. Jordan, Peter I. EdgelowAbstract:Thoracic Outlet Syndrome is a controversial entity. Diagnosis requires a thorough examination and is primarily clinical. Three main presentations exist: Neurogenic, arterial, and venous. Most cases can be managed non-operatively. Surgical decompression of the Thoracic Outlet space can be helpful in recalcitrant cases.
-
understanding Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Scientifica (Cairo), 2014Co-Authors: Julie A. Freischlag, Kristine C OrionAbstract:The diagnosis of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome was once debated in the world of vascular surgery. Today, it is more understood and surprisingly less infrequent than once thought. Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) is composed of three types: neurogenic, venous, and arterial. Each type is in distinction to the others when considering patient presentation and diagnosis. Remarkable advances have been made in surgical approach, physical therapy, and rehabilitation of these patients. Dedicated centers of excellence with multidisciplinary teams have been developed and continue to lead the way in future research.
-
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
The journal of the Turkish Society of Algology, 2013Co-Authors: Karl A. Illig, Robert W. Thompson, Julie A. Freischlag, Dean M. Donahue, Sheldon E. Jordan, Peter I. EdgelowAbstract:Thoracic Outlet Syndrome is a controversial entity. Diagnosis requires a thorough examination and is primarily clinical. Three main presentations exist: Neurogenic, arterial, and venous. Most cases can be managed non-operatively. Surgical decompression of the Thoracic Outlet space can be helpful in recalcitrant cases.
Sebastian Povlsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014Co-Authors: Bo Povlsen, Thomas Hansson, Sebastian PovlsenAbstract:Background Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) is one of the most controversial clinical entities in medicine. Despite many reports of operative and non-operative interventions, rigorous scientific investigation of this Syndrome leading to evidence based management is lacking. Objectives To evaluate the beneficial and adverse effects of the available operative and non-operative interventions for the treatment of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register (July 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2009), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2009), CINAHL (January 1981 to June 2009), AMED (January 1985 to June 2009) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria We selected randomized or quasi-randomized studies in any language of participants with the diagnosis of any type of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (neurogenic, vascular, and disputed). The primary outcome measure was change in pain rating on a validated visual analog or similar scale at least six months after the intervention. The secondary outcomes were change in muscle strength and adverse effects of the interventions. Data collection and analysis Four authors independently selected the trials to be included and extracted data. The one included study was rated for risk of bias according to the methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Main results This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted criteria for the diagnosis of TOS and had to rely exclusively on the diagnosis of TOS by the investigators in the reviewed studies. There were no studies comparing natural progression with any active intervention. In one trial with a high risk of bias involving 55 participants transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty of the brachial plexus. There were no adverse effects in either group. Authors conclusions This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of TOS. There was very low quality evidence that transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty but no randomized evidence that either is better than no treatment. There is no randomized evidence to support the use of other currently used treatments. There is a need for an agreed definition for the diagnosis of TOS, especially the disputed form, agreed outcome measures and high quality randomized trials that compare the outcome of interventions with no treatment and with each other.
Bo Povlsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014Co-Authors: Bo Povlsen, Thomas Hansson, Sebastian PovlsenAbstract:Background Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) is one of the most controversial clinical entities in medicine. Despite many reports of operative and non-operative interventions, rigorous scientific investigation of this Syndrome leading to evidence based management is lacking. Objectives To evaluate the beneficial and adverse effects of the available operative and non-operative interventions for the treatment of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register (July 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2009), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2009), CINAHL (January 1981 to June 2009), AMED (January 1985 to June 2009) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria We selected randomized or quasi-randomized studies in any language of participants with the diagnosis of any type of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (neurogenic, vascular, and disputed). The primary outcome measure was change in pain rating on a validated visual analog or similar scale at least six months after the intervention. The secondary outcomes were change in muscle strength and adverse effects of the interventions. Data collection and analysis Four authors independently selected the trials to be included and extracted data. The one included study was rated for risk of bias according to the methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Main results This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted criteria for the diagnosis of TOS and had to rely exclusively on the diagnosis of TOS by the investigators in the reviewed studies. There were no studies comparing natural progression with any active intervention. In one trial with a high risk of bias involving 55 participants transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty of the brachial plexus. There were no adverse effects in either group. Authors conclusions This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of TOS. There was very low quality evidence that transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty but no randomized evidence that either is better than no treatment. There is no randomized evidence to support the use of other currently used treatments. There is a need for an agreed definition for the diagnosis of TOS, especially the disputed form, agreed outcome measures and high quality randomized trials that compare the outcome of interventions with no treatment and with each other.
Mohammed Alomran - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
vascular Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2016Co-Authors: Mohamad A Hussain, Badr Aljabri, Mohammed AlomranAbstract:Two distinct terms are used to describe vascular Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) depending on which structure is predominantly affected: venous TOS (due to subclavian vein compression) and arterial TOS (due to subclavian artery compression). Although the venous and arterial subtypes of TOS affect only 3% and
Thomas Hansson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
treatment for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2014Co-Authors: Bo Povlsen, Thomas Hansson, Sebastian PovlsenAbstract:Background Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS) is one of the most controversial clinical entities in medicine. Despite many reports of operative and non-operative interventions, rigorous scientific investigation of this Syndrome leading to evidence based management is lacking. Objectives To evaluate the beneficial and adverse effects of the available operative and non-operative interventions for the treatment of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register (July 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2009), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2009), CINAHL (January 1981 to June 2009), AMED (January 1985 to June 2009) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria We selected randomized or quasi-randomized studies in any language of participants with the diagnosis of any type of Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (neurogenic, vascular, and disputed). The primary outcome measure was change in pain rating on a validated visual analog or similar scale at least six months after the intervention. The secondary outcomes were change in muscle strength and adverse effects of the interventions. Data collection and analysis Four authors independently selected the trials to be included and extracted data. The one included study was rated for risk of bias according to the methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Main results This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted criteria for the diagnosis of TOS and had to rely exclusively on the diagnosis of TOS by the investigators in the reviewed studies. There were no studies comparing natural progression with any active intervention. In one trial with a high risk of bias involving 55 participants transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty of the brachial plexus. There were no adverse effects in either group. Authors conclusions This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of TOS. There was very low quality evidence that transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty but no randomized evidence that either is better than no treatment. There is no randomized evidence to support the use of other currently used treatments. There is a need for an agreed definition for the diagnosis of TOS, especially the disputed form, agreed outcome measures and high quality randomized trials that compare the outcome of interventions with no treatment and with each other.
