BACKGROUND: The right phrenic nerve is at risk of injury during high mobilization of the right internal mammary artery (RIMA). The incidence and implications of this injury have not been previously defined. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on all patients who underwent RIMA harvesting between January 1995 and February 2002 were analyzed. Thirty-one patients with right phrenic nerve injury were identified and the medical charts reviewed. Phrenic nerve injury was diagnosed when a postoperative chest roentgenogram showed the right hemidiaphragm to be two or more intercostal spaces higher than the left, or transection of the nerve was seen intraoperatively. Investigations included fluoroscopy and spirometry in upright and supine positions. Diaphragm plication was offered for symptom control. Subsequent follow-up was undertaken to determine the incidence of spontaneous recovery of diaphragm function and the benefits of diaphragm plication. RESULTS: Seven hundred and eighty-three patients underwent high mobilization of the RIMA with proximal detachment for use as a free graft. Thirty-one patients with right hemidiaphragm dysfunction were identified in the postoperative period providing an injury incidence of 4% (confidence interval, 2.6% to 5.3%). Of these, 12 patients underwent diaphragm plication (4 early and 8 late), 14 patients achieved spontaneous recovery, and 5 patients were lost to follow-up. The supine to upright forced vital capacity ratios at the time of phrenic nerve dysfunction, after diaphragm plication, and after spontaneous recovery were 0.79, 0.90, and 0.96 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of phrenic nerve injury associated with high RIMA harvesting was 4% but spontaneous recovery may be anticipated in two thirds (14 of 22) of patients in whom the injury is identified postoperatively. High RIMA harvesting should be used with caution in patients with preoperative pulmonary dysfunction in whom phrenic nerve injury would be poorly tolerated.
BACKGROUND: The right phrenic nerve is at risk of injury during high mobilization of the right internal mammary artery (RIMA). The incidence and implications of this injury have not been previously defined. METHODS: Prospectively collected data on all patients who underwent RIMA harvesting between January 1995 and February 2002 were analyzed. Thirty-one patients with right phrenic nerve injury were identified and the medical charts reviewed. Phrenic nerve injury was diagnosed when a postoperative chest roentgenogram showed the right hemidiaphragm to be two or more intercostal spaces higher than the left, or transection of the nerve was seen intraoperatively. Investigations included fluoroscopy and spirometry in upright and supine positions. Diaphragm plication was offered for symptom control. Subsequent follow-up was undertaken to determine the incidence of spontaneous recovery of diaphragm function and the benefits of diaphragm plication. RESULTS: Seven hundred and eighty-three patients underwent high mobilization of the RIMA with proximal detachment for use as a free graft. Thirty-one patients with right hemidiaphragm dysfunction were identified in the postoperative period providing an injury incidence of 4% (confidence interval, 2.6% to 5.3%). Of these, 12 patients underwent diaphragm plication (4 early and 8 late), 14 patients achieved spontaneous recovery, and 5 patients were lost to follow-up. The supine to upright forced vital capacity ratios at the time of phrenic nerve dysfunction, after diaphragm plication, and after spontaneous recovery were 0.79, 0.90, and 0.96 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of phrenic nerve injury associated with high RIMA harvesting was 4% but spontaneous recovery may be anticipated in two thirds (14 of 22) of patients in whom the injury is identified postoperatively. High RIMA harvesting should be used with caution in patients with preoperative pulmonary dysfunction in whom phrenic nerve injury would be poorly tolerated.