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.
