| Literature DB >> 35698694 |
Konstantinos Manolakos1, Konstantinos Zygogiannis2, Chagigia Mousa1, Theano Demesticha3, Vasileios Protogerou3, Theodore Troupis3.
Abstract
Several anatomical variations of the iliohypogastric nerve branches have been observed in earlier studies. Knowledge of these variations is useful for the improvement of peripheral nerve blocks and avoidance of iatrogenic nerve injuries during surgeries. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature about the anatomical topography and variations of the iliohypogastric nerve. An extensive search on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases was conducted by the first author in November 2021, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Anatomical or cadaveric studies about the origin, the course, and the distribution of the iliohypogastric nerve were included in this review. Thirty cadaveric studies were included for qualitative analysis. Several anatomical variations of the iliohypogastric nerve were depicted including its general properties, its origin, its branching patterns, its course, its relation to anatomical landmarks, and its termination. Among them, the absence of the iliohypogastric nerve ranged from 0 to 34%, its origin from L1 ranged from 62.5 to 96.5%, and its isolated emergence from psoas major ranged from 47 to 94.5%. Numerous anatomical variations of the iliohypogastric nerve exist but are not commonly cited in classic anatomical textbooks. The branches of the iliohypogastric nerve may be damaged during spinal anesthesia and surgical procedures in the lower abdominal region. Therefore, a better understanding of the regional anatomy and its variations is of vital importance for the prevention of iliohypogastric nerve injuries.Entities:
Keywords: anatomical variations; iliohypogastric nerve; ilioinguinal nerve; lower abdomen; lumbar plexus
Year: 2022 PMID: 35698694 PMCID: PMC9186473 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.24910
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Figure 1Flowchart illustrating the selection of studies
Reported frequency of absence of the iliohypogastric nerve
N: number of iliohypogastric nerves studied
| Study (year) | N | Rate of absence of the iliohypogastric nerve |
| Moreno-Egea (2021) [ | 100 | 1% |
| Paul and Shastri (2019) [ | 60 | 6.6% |
| Gogi (2019) [ | 40 | 0% |
| Anandhi et al. (2018) [ | 50 | 2% |
| Arora et al. (2016) [ | 60 | 13.34% |
| Nontasaen et al. (2016) [ | 131 | 34.35% |
| Geh et al. (2015) [ | 43 | 0% |
| Gandhi et al. (2013) [ | 60 | 0% |
| Anloague and Huijbregts (2009) [ | 38 | 20.6% |
| Wijsmuller et al. (2006) [ | 18 | 0% |
Variations in the origin of the iliohypogastric nerve
N: number of iliohypogastric nerves studied
| Study (year) | N | T11-T12 | T12 | T12-L1 | L1 | L1-L2 |
| Ji and Hur (2021) [ | 30 | 0% | 28.6% | 0% | 71.4% | 0% |
| Paul and Shastri (2019) [ | 60 | 0% | 0% | 6.6% | 83.6% | 1.6% |
| Gogi (2019) [ | 40 | 0% | 0% | 37.5% | 62.5% | 0% |
| Anandhi et al. (2018) [ | 50 | 0% | 2% | 10% | 86% | 0% |
| Nontasaen et al. (2016) [ | 131 | 0% | 0% | 3.5% | 96.5% | 0% |
| Arora et al. (2016) [ | 60 | 0% | 0% | 8.33% | 78.3% | 0% |
| Gandhi et al. (2013) [ | 60 | 0% | 0% | 13.4% | 86.6% | 0% |
| Klaasen et al. (2011) [ | 200 | 6% | 7% | 14% | 73% | 0% |
Variations of the branching pattern of iliohypogastric and ilioinguinal nerves
N: number of iliohypogastric nerves studied
| Study (year) | N | Type I (single trunk of the two nerves) | Type II (two separate branches) |
| Moreno-Egea (2021) [ | 100 | 22% | 78% |
| Reinpold et al. (2015) [ | 60 | 18% | 82% |
| Geh et al. (2015) [ | 43 | 53% | 47% |
| Gandhi et al. (2013) [ | 60 | 11.7% | 88.3% |
| Klaasen et al. (2011) [ | 200 | 20% | 80% |
| Ndiaye et al. (2010) [ | 100 | 14% | 86% |
| Rahn et al. (2010) [ | 36 | 50% | 50% |
| Anloague and Huijbregts (2009) [ | 38 | 5.8% | 94.2% |
| Peschaud et al. (2006) [ | 40 | 7.5% | 92.5% |
| Tubbs et al. (2005) [ | 22 | 25% | 75% |
| Mandelkow and Loeweneck (1988) [ | 42 | 30% | 70% |
| Papadopoulos and Katritsis (1981) [ | 348 | 46.83% | 53.17% |
Mean distance from the penetration of the abdominal wall to the anterior superior iliac spine
N: number of iliohypogastric nerves studied; IHN: iliohypogastric nerve; TAM: transverse abdominal muscle; ASIS: anterior superior iliac spine; SD: standard deviation
| Study (year) | N | Mean distance from IHN penetration of TAM to ASIS (cm) ± SD |
| Klaasen et al. (2011) [ | 200 | 2.8 ± 1.3 (range: 1.1–5.5) medial; 1.4 ± 1.2 (range: 0.6–5.1) inferior |
| Whiteside et al. (2003) [ | 13 | 2.1 ± 1.8 (range: -1.6 to 5.0) medial; 0.9 ± 2.8 (range: -5.4 to 5.5) inferior |
| Reinpold et al. (2015) [ | 56 | 6.9 ± 3.1 (range: 2.0–12.3) dorsal |
Mean distance from the emergence of the internal oblique muscle to the anterior superior iliac spine
N: number of iliohypogastric nerves studied; IHN: iliohypogastric nerve; IOM: internal oblique muscle; ASIS: anterior superior iliac spine; SD: standard deviation
| Study (year) | N | Mean distance from IHN emergence of IOM to ASIS (cm) ± SD |
| Rahn et al. (2010) [ | 36 | 2.5 (range: 0–4.6) medial; 2.0 (range: 0–4.6) inferior |
| Peschaud et al. (2006) [ | 40 | 2.8 ± 1.2 (range: 2.5–3.2) medial |
| Avsar et al. (2002) [ | 24 | 3.95 (range: 1.5–8) right; 2.86 (range: 2.3–3.6) left |
| Mandelkow and Loeweneck (1988) [ | 40 | 2.59 ± 0.73 |