SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 62 - Sayı: 3

Karpal tünel sendromu tanısında median duyusal ve ulnar motor latans arasındaki fark, bileşik duyusal indeksten daha mı iyidir?

Is the difference between median sensory and ulnar motor latencies better than combined sensory index in carpal tunnel syndrome diagnosis?

Mohammadreza EMAD
Navid JAHANİ
Asma AZADEH
Ghahraman BEMANA
Pages
229–233
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Twenty-nine percent of these patients would be categorized as normal with standard nerve conduction studies.Conclusion: This new method (MSUMLD) does not need to stimulate more sites during conventional electrodiagnosis and is just a simple mathematical practice that may be a complementary method in diagnosis of mild carpal tunnel syndrome

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: This study aims to compare the sensitivity and specificity of median sensory nerve/ulnar motor nerve latency difference (MSUMLD) as a new method with combined sensory index (CSI) for accurate diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.Patients and methods: The study, which was conducted between November 2013 and May 2014, included 49 patients (7 males, 42 females; median age 45.9±6.6 years; min. 19 - max. 65) and their 97 hands.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Of the hands, 47 had symptoms and signs of carpal tunnel syndrome with normal routine nerve conduction studies (group 1) and 50 had carpal tunnel syndrome by standard criteria (group 2).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Twenty-nine percent of these patients would be categorized as normal with standard nerve conduction studies.Conclusion: This new method (MSUMLD) does not need to stimulate more sites during conventional electrodiagnosis and is just a simple mathematical practice that may be a complementary method in diagnosis of mild carpal tunnel syndrome
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare the sensitivity and specificity of median sensory nerve/ulnar motor nerve latency difference (MSUMLD) as a new method with combined sensory index (CSI) for accurate diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome.Patients and methods: The study, which was conducted between November 2013 and May 2014, included 49 patients (7 males, 42 females; median age 45.9±6.6 years; min. 19 - max. 65) and their 97 hands. Of the hands, 47 had symptoms and signs of carpal tunnel syndrome with normal routine nerve conduction studies (group 1) and 50 had carpal tunnel syndrome by standard criteria (group 2). Then, MSUMLD and CSI were performed for the two groups.Results: The median sensory-ulnar motor latency difference had sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 70%; however, CSI had a sensitivity and specificity 72% and 92%, respectively. The median sensory/ulnar motor latency difference was over the normal range in 14/47 hands (29%) with normal conventional nerve conduction study. Twenty-nine percent of these patients would be categorized as normal with standard nerve conduction studies.Conclusion: This new method (MSUMLD) does not need to stimulate more sites during conventional electrodiagnosis and is just a simple mathematical practice that may be a complementary method in diagnosis of mild carpal tunnel syndrome

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, karpal tünel sendromunun doğru tanısı için yeni bir yöntem olarak bileşik duyusal indeks (BDİ) ile birlikte median duyusal sinir/ulnar motor sinir latans farkının (MDSUMLF) duyarlılığı ve özgüllüğü karşılaştırıldı.Hastalar ve yöntemler: Kasım 2013 - Mayıs 2014 tarihleri arasında yapılan çalışmaya 49 hastanın (7 erkek, 42 kadın; medyan yaş 45.9±6.6 yıl; min. 19 - maks. 65) 97 eli dahil edildi. Ellerin 47'sinde normal rutin sinir iletim çalışmaları ile karpal tünel sendromu semptom ve belirtileri (grup 1), 50'sinde standart kriterler ile karpal tünel sendromu (grup 2) vardı. Sonra, iki grup için MDSUMLF ve BDİ uygulandı.Bulgular: Median duyusal sinir/ulnar motor sinir latans farkının %86 duyarlılığı ve %70 özgüllüğü olmasına rağmen, BDİ'nin sırasıyla %72 duyarlılığı ve %92 özgüllüğü vardı. Median duyusal sinir/ulnar motor sinir latans farkı, normal konvansiyonel sinir iletim çalışmaları ile ellerin 14/47'sinde (%29) normal aralıkta bitmiştir. Bu hastaların %29'u standart sinir iletim çalışmaları ile normal olarak sınıflandırılabilir.Sonuç: Bu yeni yöntemin (MDSUMLF) konvansiyonel elektrodiyagnoz sırasında daha fazla alanı stimüle etmesi gerekmemektedir ve hafif karpal tünel sendromu tanısında tamamlayıcı bir yöntem olabilecek sadece basit bir matematiksel uygulamadır

🔖

Cite This Article

EMAD, M., JAHANİ, N., AZADEH, A., BEMANA, G. (2022). Karpal tünel sendromu tanısında median duyusal ve ulnar motor latans arasındaki fark, bileşik duyusal indeksten daha mı iyidir?. Türkiye Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi, Cilt: 62 - Sayı: 3, 229–233. https://ajindex.com/articles/628682

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Ornstein E, Ranstam J, Rosén I. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. JAMA 1999;282:153-8
  2. Gelberman RH, Hergenroeder PT, Hargens AR, Lundborg GN, Akeson WH. The carpal tunnel syndrome. A study of carpal canal pressures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981;63:380-3
  3. Werner RA. Evaluation of work-related carpal tunnel syndrome. J Occup Rehabil 2006;16:207-22
  4. Cartwright MS, Walker FO, Blocker JN, Schulz MR, Arcury TA, Grzywacz JG, et al. The prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in Latino poultry-processing workers and other Latino manual workers. J Occup Environ Med 2012;54:198-201
  5. Szabo RM, Madison M. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Orthop Clin North Am 1992;23:103-9. 6. von Schroeder HP, Botte MJ. Carpal tunnel syndrome. Hand Clin 1996;12:643-55
  6. Keith MW, Masear V, Chung KC, Maupin K, Andary M, Amadio PC, et al. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline on diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009;91:2478-9
  7. Jablecki CK, Andary MT, So YT, Wilkins DE, Williams FH. Literature review of the usefulness of nerve conduction studies and electromyography for the evaluation of patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. AAEM Quality Assurance Committee. Muscle Nerve 1993;16:1392-414
  8. Johnson EW, Melvin JL. Sensory conduction studies of median and ulnar nerves. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1967;48:25-30
  9. Melvin JL, Schuchmann JA, Lanese RR. Diagnostic specificity of motor and sensory nerve conduction variables in the carpal tunnel syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1973;54:69-74
  10. Cruz Martínez A, Barrio M, Pérez Conde MC, Gutiérrez AM. Electrophysiological aspects of sensory conduction velocity in healthy adults
  11. Conduction velocity from digit to palm, from palm to wrist, and across the elbow, as a function of age. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1978;41:1092-6
  12. Kohara N. Clinical and electrophysiological findings in carpal tunnel syndrome. Brain Nerve 2007;59:1229-38. [Abstract] 13. Ilkhani M, Jahanbakhsh SM, Eghtesadi-Araghi P, Moayyeri A. Accuracy of somatosensory evoked potentials in diagnosis of mild idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2005;108:40-4
  13. Emad MR, Najafi SH, Sepehrian MH. The effect of provocative tests on electrodiagnosis criteria in clinical carpal tunnel syndrome. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2009;19:1061-3
  14. Bodofsky EB. Diagnosing mild Carpal Tunnel Syndrome with interpolation. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol