Study of carpal tunnel syndrome in diabetic polyneuropathy with comparison of inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test.

IF 0.5 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Current Journal of Neurology Pub Date : 2022-07-06 DOI:10.18502/cjn.v21i3.11105
Mohammadreza Emad, Laleh Abolfathi Momtaz, Leila Sadat Mohamadi Jahromi, Reyhaneh Parvin
{"title":"Study of carpal tunnel syndrome in diabetic polyneuropathy with comparison of inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test.","authors":"Mohammadreza Emad, Laleh Abolfathi Momtaz, Leila Sadat Mohamadi Jahromi, Reyhaneh Parvin","doi":"10.18502/cjn.v21i3.11105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Since diabetic generalized neuropathy affects peripheral nerves, the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) with conventional electrodiagnostic techniques (EDX) [onset latency of median sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) or distal latency of median compound muscle action potential (CMAP)] is controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic values of two other techniques including inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) as well as signs or symptoms of CTS. <b>Methods:</b> Fifteen patients (30 hands) with definite diagnosis of generalized peripheral neuropathy secondary to diabetes who developed signs and symptoms of CTS were participated. For diagnosis of CTS, sensory and motor median distal latencies were considered by nerve conduction study. In the next step, inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test were performed for all hands. Finally, sensitivity and specificity of two tests were calculated. <b>Results:</b> Mean age of participants was 53.87 ± 11.53 years. The sensitivity and specificity of inching method in this study were 95.65% and 85.71%, respectively, and for the second lumbrical-interossei test, they were 73.91% and 71.42%, respectively. <b>Conclusion:</b> Inching method was more sensitive and specific than second lumbrical-interossei test in diagnosis of CTS among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Moreover, the sensitivity of inching method was greater than specificity.</p>","PeriodicalId":40077,"journal":{"name":"Current Journal of Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10082956/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Journal of Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/cjn.v21i3.11105","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Since diabetic generalized neuropathy affects peripheral nerves, the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) with conventional electrodiagnostic techniques (EDX) [onset latency of median sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) or distal latency of median compound muscle action potential (CMAP)] is controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic values of two other techniques including inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) as well as signs or symptoms of CTS. Methods: Fifteen patients (30 hands) with definite diagnosis of generalized peripheral neuropathy secondary to diabetes who developed signs and symptoms of CTS were participated. For diagnosis of CTS, sensory and motor median distal latencies were considered by nerve conduction study. In the next step, inching method and second lumbrical-interossei test were performed for all hands. Finally, sensitivity and specificity of two tests were calculated. Results: Mean age of participants was 53.87 ± 11.53 years. The sensitivity and specificity of inching method in this study were 95.65% and 85.71%, respectively, and for the second lumbrical-interossei test, they were 73.91% and 71.42%, respectively. Conclusion: Inching method was more sensitive and specific than second lumbrical-interossei test in diagnosis of CTS among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Moreover, the sensitivity of inching method was greater than specificity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腕管综合征在糖尿病多发神经病变中的应用:点穴法与第二次腰椎-骨间试验的比较
背景:由于糖尿病全身性神经病变影响周围神经,传统电诊断技术(EDX)[正中感觉神经动作电位(SNAP)的起始潜伏期或正中复合肌肉动作电位(CMAP)的远端潜伏期]对腕管综合征(CTS)的诊断存在争议。本研究的目的是探讨其他两种技术,包括点动法和第二次骨间腰痛试验,对糖尿病多发性神经病(DPN)患者以及CTS的体征或症状的诊断价值。方法:对15例(30只手)明确诊断为糖尿病继发全身性周围神经病变并出现CTS体征和症状的患者进行研究。对于CTS的诊断,神经传导研究考虑了感觉和运动中位远端潜伏期。下一步,对所有手进行点动法和第二次骨间腰痛试验。最后,计算了两种检测方法的敏感性和特异性。结果:参与者的平均年龄为53.87±11.53岁。本研究中缓动法的敏感性和特异性分别为95.65%和85.71%,第二次骨间钩状肌试验的敏感性和特异度分别为73.91%和71.42%。结论:在糖尿病周围神经病变患者CTS的诊断中,点触法比第二次骨间腰痛试验更灵敏、特异。此外,微动法的敏感性大于特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current Journal of Neurology
Current Journal of Neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sequential changes in expression of long non-coding RNAs THRIL and MALAT1 after ischemic stroke. Tinnitus and reduced word recognition with a bilateral inferior colliculus infarction after cerebellar arteriovenous malformation embolization. Validity and reliability of the Iranian-developed version of the leisure questionnaire for people with multiple sclerosis: Psychometric properties. A study on possible risk factors for progressive supranuclear palsy in southern part of India. Anticoagulation in the management of septic cavernous sinus thrombosis secondary to rhino-orbito-cerebral mucormycosis: A retrospective real-world experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1