Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2016
Comprehensive electrophysiology in leprous neuropathy - Is there a clinico-electrophysiological dissociation?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kumar Neeraj, Malhotra Hardeep Singh, Garg Ravindra Kumar, Lalla Rakesh, Malhotra Kiran Preet, Jain Amita, Rizvi Imran
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The diagnosis of leprous neuropathy is mostly empirical and electrophysiological studies may not truly represent the clinical findings. This study comprehensively evaluates the neuroelectrophysiology and looks at clinico-electrophysiological dissociation.
METHODS: Conventional electrophysiological recording included evaluation of median, ulnar, radial, tibial, and common peroneal nerve; an extended protocol included great auricular, phrenic, and facial nerves, along with sympathetic skin response and blink reflex. Nerve biopsy and slit skin smear were done to aid categorization.
RESULTS: Forty-six patients of leprosy were enrolled. Mononeuritis multiplex was the commonest presentation. Sensory loss was commoner than motor deficits. Approximately 60% of all cases were nerve-biopsy proven. Nerve thickening was present in 38.7% (214/552) of nerves examined. Clinico-electrophysiological dissociation between nerve thickening and nerve conduction findings was present in median, ulnar, great auricular, and common peroneal nerves.
CONCLUSION: Electrophysiological findings outnumber occurrence of nerve thickening and clinical deficits in leprous neuropathy. From a clinical perspective, enlargement of great auricular, ulnar, and common peroneal nerves may be more sensitive in predicting electrophysiological abnormalities.
SIGNIFICANCE: A comprehensive nerve conduction study including great auricular and phrenic nerves, coupled with a sympathetic skin response, may aid in detecting cases with paucity of findings since such a combination is seldom seen in other disorders.
METHODS: Conventional electrophysiological recording included evaluation of median, ulnar, radial, tibial, and common peroneal nerve; an extended protocol included great auricular, phrenic, and facial nerves, along with sympathetic skin response and blink reflex. Nerve biopsy and slit skin smear were done to aid categorization.
RESULTS: Forty-six patients of leprosy were enrolled. Mononeuritis multiplex was the commonest presentation. Sensory loss was commoner than motor deficits. Approximately 60% of all cases were nerve-biopsy proven. Nerve thickening was present in 38.7% (214/552) of nerves examined. Clinico-electrophysiological dissociation between nerve thickening and nerve conduction findings was present in median, ulnar, great auricular, and common peroneal nerves.
CONCLUSION: Electrophysiological findings outnumber occurrence of nerve thickening and clinical deficits in leprous neuropathy. From a clinical perspective, enlargement of great auricular, ulnar, and common peroneal nerves may be more sensitive in predicting electrophysiological abnormalities.
SIGNIFICANCE: A comprehensive nerve conduction study including great auricular and phrenic nerves, coupled with a sympathetic skin response, may aid in detecting cases with paucity of findings since such a combination is seldom seen in other disorders.