Cargando…

Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?

Introduction: Small fiber neuropathies (SFN) induce pain and/or autonomic symptoms. The diagnosis of SFN poses a challenge because the role of skin biopsy as a reference method and of each neurophysiological test remain to be discussed. This study compares six methods evaluating small sensory and au...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fabry, Vincent, Gerdelat, Angélique, Acket, Blandine, Cintas, Pascal, Rousseau, Vanessa, Uro-Coste, Emmanuelle, Evrard, Solène M., Pavy-Le Traon, Anne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7214721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32431663
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00342
_version_ 1783532028665266176
author Fabry, Vincent
Gerdelat, Angélique
Acket, Blandine
Cintas, Pascal
Rousseau, Vanessa
Uro-Coste, Emmanuelle
Evrard, Solène M.
Pavy-Le Traon, Anne
author_facet Fabry, Vincent
Gerdelat, Angélique
Acket, Blandine
Cintas, Pascal
Rousseau, Vanessa
Uro-Coste, Emmanuelle
Evrard, Solène M.
Pavy-Le Traon, Anne
author_sort Fabry, Vincent
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Small fiber neuropathies (SFN) induce pain and/or autonomic symptoms. The diagnosis of SFN poses a challenge because the role of skin biopsy as a reference method and of each neurophysiological test remain to be discussed. This study compares six methods evaluating small sensory and autonomic nerve fibers: skin biopsy, Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST), quantitative sweat measurement system (Q-Sweat), Laser Evoked Potentials (LEP), Electrochemical Skin Conductance (ESC) measurement and Autonomic CardioVascular Tests (ACVT). Methods: This is a single center, retrospective study including patients tested for symptoms compatible with SFN between 2013 and 2016 using the afore-mentioned tests. Patients were ultimately classified according to the results and clinical features as “definite SFN,” “possible SFN” or “no SFN.” The sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of each test were calculated based on the final diagnosis and the best diagnostic strategy was then evaluated. Results: Two hundred and forty-five patients were enrolled (164 females (66.9%), age: 50.4 ± 15 years). The results are as follows: skin biopsy: Se = 58%, Sp = 91%; QST: Se = 72%, Sp = 39%; Q-Sweat: Se = 53%, Sp = 69%; LEP: Se = 66%, Sp = 89%; ESC: Se = 60%, Sp = 89%; Cardiovascular tests: Se = 15%, Sp = 99%. The combination of skin biopsy, LEP, QST and ESC has a Se of 90% and a Sp of 87%. Conclusion: Our study outlines the benefits of combining skin biopsy, ESC, LEP and QST in the diagnosis of SFN.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7214721
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72147212020-05-19 Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy? Fabry, Vincent Gerdelat, Angélique Acket, Blandine Cintas, Pascal Rousseau, Vanessa Uro-Coste, Emmanuelle Evrard, Solène M. Pavy-Le Traon, Anne Front Neurol Neurology Introduction: Small fiber neuropathies (SFN) induce pain and/or autonomic symptoms. The diagnosis of SFN poses a challenge because the role of skin biopsy as a reference method and of each neurophysiological test remain to be discussed. This study compares six methods evaluating small sensory and autonomic nerve fibers: skin biopsy, Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST), quantitative sweat measurement system (Q-Sweat), Laser Evoked Potentials (LEP), Electrochemical Skin Conductance (ESC) measurement and Autonomic CardioVascular Tests (ACVT). Methods: This is a single center, retrospective study including patients tested for symptoms compatible with SFN between 2013 and 2016 using the afore-mentioned tests. Patients were ultimately classified according to the results and clinical features as “definite SFN,” “possible SFN” or “no SFN.” The sensitivity (Se) and specificity (Sp) of each test were calculated based on the final diagnosis and the best diagnostic strategy was then evaluated. Results: Two hundred and forty-five patients were enrolled (164 females (66.9%), age: 50.4 ± 15 years). The results are as follows: skin biopsy: Se = 58%, Sp = 91%; QST: Se = 72%, Sp = 39%; Q-Sweat: Se = 53%, Sp = 69%; LEP: Se = 66%, Sp = 89%; ESC: Se = 60%, Sp = 89%; Cardiovascular tests: Se = 15%, Sp = 99%. The combination of skin biopsy, LEP, QST and ESC has a Se of 90% and a Sp of 87%. Conclusion: Our study outlines the benefits of combining skin biopsy, ESC, LEP and QST in the diagnosis of SFN. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7214721/ /pubmed/32431663 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00342 Text en Copyright © 2020 Fabry, Gerdelat, Acket, Cintas, Rousseau, Uro-Coste, Evrard and Pavy-Le Traon. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neurology
Fabry, Vincent
Gerdelat, Angélique
Acket, Blandine
Cintas, Pascal
Rousseau, Vanessa
Uro-Coste, Emmanuelle
Evrard, Solène M.
Pavy-Le Traon, Anne
Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title_full Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title_fullStr Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title_full_unstemmed Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title_short Which Method for Diagnosing Small Fiber Neuropathy?
title_sort which method for diagnosing small fiber neuropathy?
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7214721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32431663
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00342
work_keys_str_mv AT fabryvincent whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT gerdelatangelique whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT acketblandine whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT cintaspascal whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT rousseauvanessa whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT urocosteemmanuelle whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT evrardsolenem whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy
AT pavyletraonanne whichmethodfordiagnosingsmallfiberneuropathy