Abstract

PurposePeripheral neuropathies are a group of disorders which affect the peripheral nervous system which have been conventionally diagnosed using electrodiagnostic studies. This study was carried out to assess the role of imaging in diagnosing peripheral mononeuropathy as exact anatomical localisation of the pathology is possible using high-resolution ultrasound and MR neurography, the modalities assessed in this study.MethodA hospital-based prospective analytical study was carried out in a resource-limited setting on 180 peripheral nerves in 131 patients with symptoms of peripheral mononeuropathy after taking IRB approval. Each patient underwent high-resolution ultrasound examination and MR neurography, findings of which were then compared and statistically analysed assuming electrodiagnostic findings as the gold standard.ResultsOverall, the diagnostic accuracy was highest for the proton density fat-saturated MR sequence (93.89%) followed by high-resolution ultrasound (80%). The sensitivity was highest for proton density fat-saturated sequence while the T1 MR sequence had the highest specificity. Combined diagnostic accuracy of both modalities was calculated to be 93.33% with a negative predictive value of 80%. High-resolution ultrasound and MRI equally detected the cases with nerve discontinuity, while neuromas were better identified on MRI.ConclusionWith the advent of higher frequency probes and improved MR field strength, imaging of peripheral nerves is possible with better accuracy. Imaging assessment of nerves allows anatomical delineation with identification of exact site of involvement. This comparative study demonstrates the role of imaging in diagnosing peripheral nerve pathologies with the accuracy of MRI as high as 93.89% which may serve as an imaging gold standard. High-resolution ultrasound, being quicker, cost effective and a comparable accuracy of 80% can serve as a reliable screening tool. This study incorporates a larger study group and compares HRUS with MRI, taking NCV as gold standard, which has not been done in the preceding studies. With this study, we conclude that these two imaging modalities are not mutually exclusive. Rather, they complement each other and can be used in conjunction as an imaging yardstick for diagnosing peripheral neuropathies.

Highlights

  • Overall, the diagnostic accuracy was highest for the proton density fat-saturated magnetic resonance (MR) sequence (93.89%) followed by high-resolution ultrasound (80%)

  • High-resolution ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) detected the cases with nerve discontinuity, while neuromas were better identified on MRI

  • Imaging assessment of nerves allows anatomical delineation with identification of exact site of involvement. This comparative study demonstrates the role of imaging in diagnosing peripheral nerve pathologies with the accuracy of MRI as high as 93.89% which may serve as an imaging gold standard

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Peripheral neuropathy is a disorder of nerve(s) apart from the brain and spinal cord which indicates any disorder of the peripheral nervous system with variable presentation and numerous causes. The usual presenting complaints of patients with peripheral neuropathy include tingling, unusual sensations, numbness, weakness or burning pain in the affected area. Any damage or disease affecting peripheral nerves in roughly the same areas on both sides of the body, manifesting as weakness, numbness and burning pain is referred to as polyneuropathy [1]. Seddon (1943) and Sunderland (1951) classified nerve injuries into five types to which Mackinnon and Dellon added a sixth type in 1992. This grade VI injury is as a mixed type of injury which denotes various types of injuries across the cross section of the nerve [4,5,6].

Objectives
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call