An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome

ONAR, Musa Kazım; BAYRAK OYTUN, Ayşe; DEMİR, İlknur Aygün; Bek, Yuksel

An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome

İlknur Aygün DEMİR, (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Nöroloji Anabilim Dalı, Samsun, Türkiye)

Ayşe BAYRAK OYTUN, (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Nöroloji Anabilim Dalı, Samsun, Türkiye)

Yüksel BEK, (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Biyoistatistik Anabilim Dalı, Samsun, Türkiye)

Musa Kazım ONAR (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Nöroloji Anabilim Dalı, Samsun, Türkiye)

Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish)

0 0

Yıl: 2011 Cilt: 28 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 181 - 189 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome

Öz:

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı karpal tünel sendromunda (KTS) karşılaştırma tekniklerinin tanısal değerlerini farklı elektrofizyolojik evrelere göre belirlemektir. Hastalar ve Metodlar: Altmış bir hastanın 100 eli ile 50 sağlıklı gönüllünün 100 eli elektrofizyolojik olarak değerlendirildi. Rutin sinir iletim çalışmalarına göre KTS dört evreye ayrıldı. Üç motor ve iki duysal karşılaştırma tekniği değerlendirildi. Motor teknikler; 2. lumbrikal-interosseus distal motor latans farkı (2LI-DMLF), median-tenar ulnar-hipotenar latans farkı (THLF) ve median-tenar ulnar-tenar latans farkı (TTLF) tekniklerini içermekte idi. İki duysal teknik ise 1. parmak duysal latans farkı (1PDLF) ve 4. parmak duysal latans farkını (4PDLF) içermekte idi.Bulgular: Elektrofizyolojik değerlendirme sonucunda KTS 47 elde hafif, 47 elde orta ve 6 elde ağır evrede bulundu. Karşılaştırma testlerinin KTS tanısı için sensitivite ve spesiviteleri sırası ile 4PDLF için 100% ve 100%, THLF için 98% and 98%, 2LI-DMLF için 92% ve 92%, 1PDLF için 88.3% ve 87% ve TTLF için 87% ve 92% olarak bulundu. En sensitif ve spesifik teknik hafif olgularda 4PDLF, orta olgularda 4PDLF ve THLF ile ağır olgularda THLF ve 2LI-DMLF olarak bulundu. Tartışma: Karşılaştırma teknikleri, kolayca uygulanabilen ve KTS tanısı için kullanışlı tekniklerdir. Tanısal açıdan en değerli teknikler, hafif olgularda 4PDLF, orta olgularda 4PDLF ve THLF ile ağır olgularda THLF ve 2LI-DMLF'dır.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Nörolojik Bilimler

Karpal tünel sendromunun elektrofizyolojik tanısında karşılaştırma tekniklerinin sensitivite ve spesifitelerinin değerlendirilmesi

Öz:

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of the comparative techniques in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) at various electrophysiological stages. Patients and Methods: One hundred hands of 61 patients and 100 hands of 50 healthy volunteers were examined electrophysiologically. The CTS was classified in to four stages according to findings from routine nerve conduction studies. Three motor techniques and two sensory techniques were assessed. The motor techniques included the 2nd lumbricales to interossei distal motor latency difference (2LI-DMLD), the median-thenar to ulnar- hypothenar latency difference (THLD) and the median-thenar to ulnar-thenar latency difference (TTLD). The two sensory techniques included the digit 1 sensory latency difference (D1SLD) and the digit 4 sensory latency difference (D4SLD). Results: From the electrophysiological assessment, we found that the CTS stage was mild in 47 hands, moderate in 47 hands and severe in 6 hands. The respective sensitivities and specificities of diagnosing CTS were 100% and 100% for D4SLD, 98% and 98% for THLD, 92% and 92% for 2LI-DMLD, 88.3% and 87% for D1SLD and 87% and 92% for TTLD. The most sensitive and specific technique were found to be D4SLD in mild cases, D4SLD and THLD in moderate cases and THLD and 2LI-DMLD in severe cases. Conclusion: Comparative techniques can be easily performed and are useful in the diagnosis of CTS. The most valuable techniques were D4SLD in mild cases, D4SLD and THLD in moderate cases and THLD and 2LI-DMLD in severe cases.

Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Nörolojik Bilimler

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1.Al-Shekhlee A, Fernandes Filho JA, Sukul D, et al. Optimal recording electrode placement ın the lumbrical-interossei comparıson study. Muscle Nerve 2006;33:289-293.
2.Argyriou AA, Karanasios P, Makridou A, et al. The significance of second lumbrical-interosseous latency comparison in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Acta Neurol Scand 2009;120:198-203
3.Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, et al. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. JAMA 1999;282:153-158.
4.Banach M, Slowik A, Szcudlik A. The value of motor latency difference measurements between the second lumbrical muscle and second interosseous muscle in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurol Neurochir Pol.2002;36(4):657-67.
5.Carroll GJ. Comparison of median and radial nerve sensory latencies in the electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1987;68(2):101-6.
6.Cassvan A, Ralescu S, Shapiro E, et al. Median and radial sensory latencies to digit I as compared with other screening tests in carpal tunnel syndrome. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.1988;67(5):221-4.
7.Cifu DX, Saleem S. Median-radial latency difference: its use in screening for carpal tunnel syndrome in twenty patients with demyelinating peripheral neuropathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993;74(1):44-7.
8.Demirci S, Sonel B. Comparison of sensory conduction techniques of mild idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome:which finger, which test?. Rheumatol Int.2004;24(4):217-20.
9.Felsenthal G. Median and ulnar distal motor and sensory latencies in the same normal subject. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1977;58:297302.
10.Ghavanini MR, Kazemi B, Jazayeri M, et al. Median-radial sensory latencies comparison as a new test in carpal tunnel syndrome. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol.1996;36(3):171-3.
11.Jablecki CK, Andary MT, Floeter MK, et al. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine; American Academy of Neurology;American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.Practice parameter: elektrodiagnostic studies in carpal tunnel syndrome. Report of the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine; American Academy of Neurology and American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Neurology 2002; 58: 1589-92.
12.Kimura J. Disorders of the spinal cord and peripheral nervous system. In:Kimura J.Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nevre and muscle: principles and practice. Philafelphia: Oxford University Press, 2001;720-724.
13.Kouyoumdjian JA. Carpal tunnel syndrome: sensory median-radial latency difference versus conduction studies in 1059 hands (668 cases). Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 1999;57(2A):208-15.
14. Meena AK, Srinivasa Rao B, Sailaja S, et al. Second lumbrical and interossei latency difference in carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol 2008;119(12):2789-94.
15.Nathan PA, Meadows KD, Doyle LS. Sensory segmental latency values of the median nerve for a population of normal individuals. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1988; 69:499-501.
16. Padua L, LoMonaco M, Gregori B, et al. Neurophysiological classification and sensitivity in 500 carpal tunnel syndrome hands. Acta Neurol Scand. 1997;96:211-217.
17.Preston DC, Logigian EL. Lumbrical and interossei recording in carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1992;15:1253-57.
18.Preston DC, Kothari MJ, Ross MH, et al. The median-ulnar latency difference studies are comparable in mild carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1994;17:1469-71.
19.Preston DC, Shapiro BE. Electromyography and Neuromuscular Disorders. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2005;36-43.
20.Sander HW, Quinto C, Saadeh PB, et al. Sensitive MedianUlnar Motor Comparative Techniques in carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1999;22:88 98.
21.Seror P. The value of special motor and sensory tests for the diagnosis of benign and minor median nerve lesion at the wrist. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1995;74:124129.
22.Shean GL. Houser MK, Murray NM. Lumbrical- interosseus latency comparison in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995;97:285-289.
23.Tobin WE, Jeffreys DE. Detection of carpal tunnel syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1973;54:373 375.
24.Ubogu EE, Benatar M. Electrodiagnostıc Criteria for Carpal Tünnel Syndrome in Axonal Polyneuropathy. Muscle Nerve 2006;33: 747752.
25.Uncini A, Di Muzio A, Awad J, et al. Sensitivity of three median-to-ulnar comparative tests in diagnosis of mild carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 1994;17(8):955-6.
26.Vogt T, Mika A, Thomke F, et al. Evaluation of carpal tunnel syndrome in patients with polineuropathy. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:153-157.

APA	DEMİR İ, BAYRAK OYTUN A, Bek Y, ONAR M (2011). An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. , 181 - 189.
Chicago	DEMİR İlknur Aygün,BAYRAK OYTUN Ayşe,Bek Yuksel,ONAR Musa Kazım An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. (2011): 181 - 189.
MLA	DEMİR İlknur Aygün,BAYRAK OYTUN Ayşe,Bek Yuksel,ONAR Musa Kazım An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. , 2011, ss.181 - 189.
AMA	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. . 2011; 181 - 189.
Vancouver	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. . 2011; 181 - 189.
IEEE	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M "An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome." , ss.181 - 189, 2011.
ISNAD	DEMİR, İlknur Aygün vd. "An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome". (2011), 181-189.

APA	DEMİR İ, BAYRAK OYTUN A, Bek Y, ONAR M (2011). An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish), 28(2), 181 - 189.
Chicago	DEMİR İlknur Aygün,BAYRAK OYTUN Ayşe,Bek Yuksel,ONAR Musa Kazım An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish) 28, no.2 (2011): 181 - 189.
MLA	DEMİR İlknur Aygün,BAYRAK OYTUN Ayşe,Bek Yuksel,ONAR Musa Kazım An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish), vol.28, no.2, 2011, ss.181 - 189.
AMA	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish). 2011; 28(2): 181 - 189.
Vancouver	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish). 2011; 28(2): 181 - 189.
IEEE	DEMİR İ,BAYRAK OYTUN A,Bek Y,ONAR M "An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome." Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish), 28, ss.181 - 189, 2011.
ISNAD	DEMİR, İlknur Aygün vd. "An evaluation of the sensitivities and specificities of the comparative techniques for electrophysiological diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome". Journal of Neurological Sciences (Turkish) 28/2 (2011), 181-189.