| Literature DB >> 32642160 |
Duk Hwan Moon1, Du-Young Kang2, Hye Sun Lee3, Ji-Won Lee4, Yong-Jae Lee4, Sungsoo Lee1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy (ETS) has not been widely adopted for treating craniofacial hyperhidrosis (CFH) due to its known postoperative complication, compensatory hyperhidrosis (CH). In this study, we evaluated whether the autonomic nerve analysis data via pre-ETS heart rate variability (HRV) test can predict post-ETS CH in patients with CFH.Entities:
Keywords: Craniofacial hyperhidrosis (CFH); compensatory hyperhidrosis (CS); endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy (ETS); heart rate variability test (HRV)
Year: 2020 PMID: 32642160 PMCID: PMC7330312 DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2020.03.28
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Thorac Dis ISSN: 2072-1439 Impact factor: 2.895
Figure 1New endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy technique for craniofacial hyperhidrosis: R2 and R4–R7 sympathicotomy with R4–R7 truncal ablation.
Figure 2Frequency of compensatory hyperhidrosis, based on site.
Overall compensatory hyperhidrosis grade distribution of craniofacial hyperhidrosis post-endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy
| Compensatory grade | N (%) (N=53) |
|---|---|
| None | 10 (18.9) |
| Mild | 17 (32.1) |
| Moderate | 17 (32.1) |
| Severe | 9 (17.0) |
Preoperative patients’ baseline characteristics according to the degree of compensation
| Variables | Trivial compensation, n=27 | Serious compensation, n=26 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years (mean ± SD) | 42.1±13.2 | 43.0±13.5 | 0.794 |
| Male, n (%) | 23 (85.2) | 18 (69.2) | 0.165 |
| BMI, kg/m2 (mean ± SD) | 26.1±3.5 | 26.3±3.4 | 0.867 |
| Mean HR, bpm (mean ± SD) | 75.3±11.0 | 77.4±15.6 | 0.567 |
| SDNN, ms (mean ± SD) | 33.041±19.558 | 34.587±21.307 | 0.784 |
| RMSSD, ms (mean ± SD) | 30.336±26.737 | 27.121±31.981 | 0.693 |
| PSI (mean ± SD) | 100.774±122.211 | 120.324±105.954 | 0.545 |
| TP, ms2 (mean ± SD) | 937.070±1,309.265 | 1,045.784±946.308 | 0.731 |
| VLF, ms2 (mean ± SD) | 435.718±658.683 | 505.762±567.807 | 0.681 |
| LF, ms2 (mean ± SD) | 279.023±471.257 | 323.712±466.973 | 0.730 |
| HF, ms2 (mean ± SD) | 218.626±324.890 | 224.002±277.592 | 0.949 |
| LF norm (mean ± SD) | 57.288±12.372 | 59.030±28.664 | 0.777 |
| HF norm (mean ± SD) | 42.712±12.372 | 40.958±28.654 | 0.776 |
| LF/HF (mean ± SD) | 1.566±0.882 | 3.182±3.360 | 0.0246 |
SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index; HR, heart rate; SDNN, standard deviation of RR intervals; RMSSD, root mean square of successive RR interval differences; PSI, physical stress index; TP, total power; VLF, power in very low frequency; LF, power in low frequency; HF, power in high frequency; LF norm, LF power in normalized units; HF norm, HF power in normalized units.
Comparison of the degree of compensatory hyperhidrosis based on LF/HF value range
| Variables | Autonomic nerve ratio | Trivial compensation, n=27 | Serious compensation, n=26 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LF/HF | <0.001 | |||
| ≤0.66 | Parasympathetic dominant | 2 | 11 | |
| 0.66–2.60 | Balanced | 23 | 2 | |
| ≥2.60 | Sympathetic dominant | 2 | 13 |
LF, power in low frequency; HF, power in high frequency.
Figure 3Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the predictive ability of LF/HF value for compensatory hyperhidrosis. LF/HF, low frequency/high frequency.