It has been brought to the Publisher's attention that figures were mislabeled in the
above-mentioned article published in the Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, Volume 33, Number 1, pages 63–69 (DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1588018). Also there were errors in two sentences on pages 64 and 66.
The correct figures and the corrected sentences appear as follows:
Fig. 2 SF-36 physical functioning survey scores. A 26% improvement was noted following phrenic
nerve reconstruction. SF-36, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey.Fig. 3 Average pre- and postoperative phrenic nerve conduction latencies. Reference value
of 7 ± 1.4 ms is shown graphically.Fig. 4 Mean pre- and postoperative diaphragm motor amplitudes (mV).
On page 64: para 1, line 8
Although the long-term impact of diaphragmatic paralysis on the respiratory system has not been rigorously evaluated, it has been suggested that
a chronic reduction in lower lung aeration not only compromises function, but also
increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and the onset of obstructive pulmonary
disorders.
In 50% of patients, there was a reversal of paradoxical movement and an improved static
position of the diaphragm following treatment, whereas optimal fluoroscopic diaphragmatic
activity (symmetrical static and dynamic positioning of the treated side when compared
with the contralateral unaffected hemidiaphragm) was observed in 36% of patients.
