English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We read with interest the case presented by Panagouli et al. (1) concerning the unusual bilateral duplication of the suprascapular vein revealed by the Anatomage table. It is valuable to report findings on the cadavers incorporated into the Anatomage table because this resource is accessible worldwide. However, we would like to bring attention to the fact that the suprascapular vein (SV) may be rather more variable than the Panagouli et al. (2019) report states. The SV is rather variable. It is not unusual to find the SV duplicated (2-5) and its site of drainage is variable as well (6). A duplicated SV was reported in 30 out of 103 cadaveric specimens of Korean origin (29.7%) by Yang et al. in 2012 (2) and in 9 out of 88 cadaveric specimens of Polish origin (12.2%) by Jezierski et al. 2016 (3). Furthermore, Podgorski et al. (2014) demonstrated detailed observations on the SV around the suprascapular notch (SSN) area. They reported 35 out of 60 selected dissections exhibiting variable suprascapular vascular arrangements. Twenty SSNs showed a duplicated SV, while 15 featured a triplicated SV. They proposed denominating the vein passing within the SSN by the term “suprascapular notch vein” on the basis of the fact that its course was distinguishably duplicated in 11 specimens (4). The SV was found to drain into the external jugular vein in 60% of cases, and in the remaining cases it drained into the subclavian vein and into some other veins (6). Regarding SV involvement in suprascapular nerve entrapment, it is not a definite risk factor. An existing SV within the SSN does not necessary reduce the space to a critical point, and it may rather serve as a protective cushion for the suprascapular nerve against the bony margins of the SSN during dynamic movements (3, 5). In conclusion, we endorse reporting this variant structure in a cadaver used by multiple global users via the Anatomage table. Indeed, this report will draw attention to SV variability. However, we emphasize that it is not an unusual case, and that a duplicated SV is rather common.

acta medica academica

Letter to the Editor: Regarding “An Unusual Bilateral Duplication of the Suprascapular Vein and Its Relation to the Superior Transverse Scapular Ligament Revealed by Anatomage Table”