Evan L Reynolds, Fallon Koenig, Maya Watanabe, Alyssa Kwiatek, Melissa A Elafros, Amro Stino, Don Henderson, David N Herrmann, Eva L Feldman, Brian C Callaghan
{"title":"表皮内神经纤维密度与共聚焦角膜显微镜在神经病变方面的比较。","authors":"Evan L Reynolds, Fallon Koenig, Maya Watanabe, Alyssa Kwiatek, Melissa A Elafros, Amro Stino, Don Henderson, David N Herrmann, Eva L Feldman, Brian C Callaghan","doi":"10.1002/acn3.52218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare the diagnostic characteristics of intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) and confocal corneal microscopy (CCM) for distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) and small fiber neuropathy (SFN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with obesity were recruited from bariatric surgery clinics and testing was performed prior to surgery. DSP and SFN were determined using the Toronto consensus definitions of probable neuropathy. IENFD was assessed from 3 mm punch biopsies of the distal leg and proximal thigh. CCM was performed on both eyes with manual and automated counting. The Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq) was also completed. Diagnostic capability was determined using areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) from logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 140 participants (mean [standard deviation [SD]] age: 50.3 years [7.1], 77.1% female, BMI: 44.4 kg/m<sup>2</sup> [6.7]). In this population, 22.9% had DSP and 14.3% had SFN. Distal leg IENFD had the largest AUC (95% confidence interval) for DSP (0.78, 0.68-0.89) and SFN (0.85, 0.75-0.96). Proximal thigh IENFD (DSP: AUC: 0.59, 0.48-0.69, SFN: AUC: 0.59, 0.46-0.73) and CCM metrics (DSP: AUC range: 0.55-0.60, SFN: AUC range: 0.45-0.62) had poorer diagnostic capability than distal leg IENFD for DSP/SFN (P < 0.05). MNSIq had similar diagnostic capability to distal leg IENFD for both DSP/SFN (DSP: AUC: 0.76, 0.68-0.85, SFN: AUC: 0.81, 0.73-0.88). More participants (52%) preferred skin biopsies to CCM.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Distal leg IENFD was the best quantitative measure of DSP/SFN. CCM had poor diagnostic characteristics and fewer patients preferred this test to IENFD. The MNSIq had similar diagnostic characteristics to distal leg IENFD, indicating its value as a diagnostic tool in the clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03617185.</p>","PeriodicalId":126,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of intraepidermal nerve fiber density and confocal corneal microscopy for neuropathy.\",\"authors\":\"Evan L Reynolds, Fallon Koenig, Maya Watanabe, Alyssa Kwiatek, Melissa A Elafros, Amro Stino, Don Henderson, David N Herrmann, Eva L Feldman, Brian C Callaghan\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acn3.52218\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Compare the diagnostic characteristics of intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) and confocal corneal microscopy (CCM) for distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) and small fiber neuropathy (SFN).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants with obesity were recruited from bariatric surgery clinics and testing was performed prior to surgery. DSP and SFN were determined using the Toronto consensus definitions of probable neuropathy. IENFD was assessed from 3 mm punch biopsies of the distal leg and proximal thigh. CCM was performed on both eyes with manual and automated counting. The Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq) was also completed. Diagnostic capability was determined using areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) from logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We enrolled 140 participants (mean [standard deviation [SD]] age: 50.3 years [7.1], 77.1% female, BMI: 44.4 kg/m<sup>2</sup> [6.7]). In this population, 22.9% had DSP and 14.3% had SFN. Distal leg IENFD had the largest AUC (95% confidence interval) for DSP (0.78, 0.68-0.89) and SFN (0.85, 0.75-0.96). Proximal thigh IENFD (DSP: AUC: 0.59, 0.48-0.69, SFN: AUC: 0.59, 0.46-0.73) and CCM metrics (DSP: AUC range: 0.55-0.60, SFN: AUC range: 0.45-0.62) had poorer diagnostic capability than distal leg IENFD for DSP/SFN (P < 0.05). MNSIq had similar diagnostic capability to distal leg IENFD for both DSP/SFN (DSP: AUC: 0.76, 0.68-0.85, SFN: AUC: 0.81, 0.73-0.88). More participants (52%) preferred skin biopsies to CCM.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Distal leg IENFD was the best quantitative measure of DSP/SFN. CCM had poor diagnostic characteristics and fewer patients preferred this test to IENFD. The MNSIq had similar diagnostic characteristics to distal leg IENFD, indicating its value as a diagnostic tool in the clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registration: </strong>clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03617185.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.52218\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acn3.52218","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of intraepidermal nerve fiber density and confocal corneal microscopy for neuropathy.
Objective: Compare the diagnostic characteristics of intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) and confocal corneal microscopy (CCM) for distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) and small fiber neuropathy (SFN).
Methods: Participants with obesity were recruited from bariatric surgery clinics and testing was performed prior to surgery. DSP and SFN were determined using the Toronto consensus definitions of probable neuropathy. IENFD was assessed from 3 mm punch biopsies of the distal leg and proximal thigh. CCM was performed on both eyes with manual and automated counting. The Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq) was also completed. Diagnostic capability was determined using areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) from logistic regression.
Results: We enrolled 140 participants (mean [standard deviation [SD]] age: 50.3 years [7.1], 77.1% female, BMI: 44.4 kg/m2 [6.7]). In this population, 22.9% had DSP and 14.3% had SFN. Distal leg IENFD had the largest AUC (95% confidence interval) for DSP (0.78, 0.68-0.89) and SFN (0.85, 0.75-0.96). Proximal thigh IENFD (DSP: AUC: 0.59, 0.48-0.69, SFN: AUC: 0.59, 0.46-0.73) and CCM metrics (DSP: AUC range: 0.55-0.60, SFN: AUC range: 0.45-0.62) had poorer diagnostic capability than distal leg IENFD for DSP/SFN (P < 0.05). MNSIq had similar diagnostic capability to distal leg IENFD for both DSP/SFN (DSP: AUC: 0.76, 0.68-0.85, SFN: AUC: 0.81, 0.73-0.88). More participants (52%) preferred skin biopsies to CCM.
Interpretation: Distal leg IENFD was the best quantitative measure of DSP/SFN. CCM had poor diagnostic characteristics and fewer patients preferred this test to IENFD. The MNSIq had similar diagnostic characteristics to distal leg IENFD, indicating its value as a diagnostic tool in the clinical setting.
期刊介绍：
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology is a peer-reviewed journal for rapid dissemination of high-quality research related to all areas of neurology. The journal publishes original research and scholarly reviews focused on the mechanisms and treatments of diseases of the nervous system; high-impact topics in neurologic education; and other topics of interest to the clinical neuroscience community.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
