CI-IAPTER 5 DISCUSSION
5.2 CERVICAL SYMPATHETIC CHAIN
5.2.3 Middle Cervical Ganglion
Becker and Grunt (1957).
It should be noted that this study reports the higher incidence of the normaVtypical MCG (as per textbook definition), TypeIIMCG(46.6%) than theTypeIMCG(27.6%) and Type III(32.8%). Ofthe 15 chains in which a double MCGwas found, in 8 sides [13.8%]Types IandllMCGwere present; in 4 sides [6.9OJIo] Types IandmMCGwere present; while in 3 sides [5.2%]Types IIandIIIwere present. Therefore, a total of 62 MCG was found.
Type II MCG has been combined with Type I MCG to facilitate a comparison with the reviewed literature. A comparison of frequency of occurrence ofTypes IandIIwithType IIIMCG, reported in literature and in this study is indicated in Table 29.
Table 29: Comparison o[incidences o[Types 1&IIMCG
The weighted mean incidence for the 'high' MCG calculated from the literature reviewed (Table 29) differs significantly from the incidence reported in this study (40.4% vs. 74.2%).
When compared to individual authors however similarities where noted in that Jamieson et al. (1952) and Pick and Sheehan (1946) reported a higher incide.nce ofthe 'high' MCG. It should be noted that if the normal/typical MCG was excluded from the 'high' MCG (as it should be) then this study reports the incidence of a 'high' MCG as 27.6% and a 'low' MCG as 31.8%. Ifthis is compared to the literature reviewed then similarities where noted with the findings of Kirgis and Kuntz (1942) and Jamieson et al. (1952) who reported incidences for a 'high' MCG of32% and 35%, respectively.
The results of this study show a greater frequency ofMCG lying at or below the level ofC6 vertebra (Types Il and Ill), in keeping with the results ofKirgis and Kuntz (1942), Mitchell (1953) and Becker and Grunt (1957), who describe this MCG as occurring more frequently.
Only Pick and Sheehan (1946) and Jamieson et a1.(1952) report a greater incidence of the
"high" MCG (Type I MCG).
Several other authors also comment on the greater frequency of the 'low'l'vertebral' ganglion but fail to provide numeric evidence (Axford, 1928, Sheehan, 1933, Woollard and Norrish, 1933, Saccomanno, 1943, Bonica, 1953).Itshould however be noted that various authors have used different vertebral levels to distinguish a high and a low MCG, e.g.
Becker and Grunt (1957) defines a 'high' MCG' as any ganglion lying at C6 vertebra or above; Jamieson et a1.(1952) defines a 'high' MCG as any ganglion lying above the transverse process of C6 vertebra; Axford (1928) defined a 'high' MCG as occurring at the
The 'low' MCG is frequently referred to as the "vertebral ganglion" because of its frequent association with the vertebral artery. Some authors have suggested that the vertebral ganglion merely represents a detached portion ofthe MCG or ICG (Axford, 1928; Woolard and Norrish, 1933). However, Mitchell (1953) and Becker and Grunt (1957) report that this ganglion does not vary inversely in size with either the MCG or the ICG. This study corroborates this finding. The term 'vertebral ganglion' is inappropriate because the vertebral nerve arises from the CTG.
On the other hand, the term 'intermediate ganglion' purported by Jonnesco (1923) is inapt as well since this term is usedtodescribe ganglia found on the rami communicantes and the ventral rami especially to the limb plexuses. Lazorthes and Cassans (1939) suggestion that the 'low' MCG be grouped together as CTG is badly chosen as the 'low' MCG cannot be regarded as a detached portion ofCTG. Furthermore, the 'low' MCG is entirely cervical.
This study concurs with the observation of Potts (1925) that the Types II and III (low/vertebral) MCG supplies the cardiac plexus. The study also confirms the close relation ofthe vertebral artery to the Type IllMCG.
The term "thyroid ganglion ofHaller (or Krause)" has been applied to the 'high' MCG and is unsuitable because the ganglion is not closely related to the thyroid gland or to the inferior thyroid artery and furthermore there exists more than one thyroid artery.
The literature reviewed presented inconsistencies with regards to the vertebral levels of the 'high' and 'low' MCG. The cervical ganglia are recorded according to their positions relative to each other on the cervical chain viz. superior, middle and inferior ganglia.
Differentiating MCG into Type1,11and Type IIIseems more appropriate because while it still maintains its name relative to the other cervical ganglia, Type I, Type IIand Type III (not used previously in literature) will establish a common vertebral location for comparison. Hollinshead (1968) suggests the terms supero-middle and infero-rniddle.
In the adult specimens, the mean distance from the lower pole of SCG to the upper pole of the Type I MCG, Type IIMCG and Type IIIMCG was 22.4mm, 55.2mm and 64.4mm, respectively [figure29]. Jamieson reported the length of chain from the upper pole of SCG to the upper pole ofMCG to be 57mm. He did not differentiate between the different types of MCG. Without differentiating between the three types of MCG, this study records a distance of 45.6rnm between the lower pole of SCG and the upper pole of MCG. The distance between the lower pole of MCG(TypeII)and the upper pole of CTG recorded in this study compares favourably with that reported by Jamieson et al.(l952) (12.6rnm vs.
15mm).
widely from the results of Jamieson et af. (1952) who reported the length of 'low' MCG, 14mm; 'high' MCG, 3mm. Our results support the results of Beck er and Grunt (1957) and Mitchell (1953) that the average size of the different types ofMCG remains fairly constant regardless if one or the other is present.
This study also concurs with Axford (1928), Jamieson et a/'(1952), Mitchell (1953) and Becker and Grunt (1952) that there is sufficient evidence to include two types ofMCG as a constant entity in the cervical sympathetic chain.