PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · J Brachial Plex Peripher Nerve Inj 2020; 15(01): e16-e21
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1714742
Original Contribution

An Additional Electrodiagnostic Tool for Ulnar Neuropathy: Mixed across the Elbow

Drew B. Parkhurst 
1   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan State University, Lansing, Michigan, United States
,
Michael T. Andary
1   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan State University, Lansing, Michigan, United States
,
John W. Powell
1   Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan State University, Lansing, Michigan, United States
› Institutsangaben Funding None.
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background Diagnosing ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE) remains challenging despite guidelines from national organizations. Motor testing of hand intrinsic muscles remains a common diagnostic method fraught with challenges.

Objective The aim of the study is to demonstrate utility of an uncommon nerve conduction study (NCS), mixed across the elbow, when diagnosing UNE.

Methods Retrospective analysis of 135 patients, referred to an outpatient University-based electrodiagnostic laboratory with suspected UNE between January 2013 and June 2019 who had motor to abductor digiti minimi (ADM), motor to first dorsal interosseus (FDI), and mixed across the elbow NCS completed. To perform the mixed across the elbow NCS, the active bar electrode was placed 10-cm proximal to the medial epicondyle between the biceps and triceps muscle bellies. The median nerve was stimulated at the wrist followed by stimulation of the ulnar nerve at the ulnar styloid. The difference between peak latencies, labeled the ulnar-median mixed latency difference (U-MLD), was used to evaluate for correlation between the nerve conduction velocities (NCV) of ADM and FDI.

Results Pearson r-values = −0.479 and −0.543 (p < 0.00001) when comparing U-MLD to ADM and FDI NCV across the elbow, respectively. The negative r-value describes the inverse relationship between ulnar velocity across the elbow and increasing U-MLD.

Conclusion Mixed across the elbow has moderate–strong correlation with ADM and FDI NCV across the elbow. All three tests measure ulnar nerve function slightly differently. Without further prospective data, the most accurate test remains unclear. The authors propose some combination of the three tests may be most beneficial when diagnosing UNE.

Keywords

electrodiagnostic testing - ulnar neuropathy - elbow - nerve conduction velocity

Note

Previous Presentation: Awarded a “Top Poster” Designation at Association of Academic Physiatrists Annual Meeting in Orlando, FL 2020.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 15. April 2020

Angenommen: 08. Juni 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
26. August 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

 

  • References

  • 1 Campbell WW. Ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Muscle Nerve 2000; 23 (04) 450-452
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Heise CO, Toledo SM. Mixed latency difference for diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87 (03) 408-410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Colorado BS, Osei DA. Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome presenting with symptoms in an ulnar nerve distribution: a prospective study. Muscle Nerve 2019; 59 (01) 60-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Beekman R, Van Der Plas JP, Uitdehaag BM, Schellens RL, Visser LH. Clinical, electrodiagnostic, and sonographic studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Muscle Nerve 2004; 30 (02) 202-208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Alrajeh M, Preston DC. Neuromuscular ultrasound in electrically non-localizable ulnar neuropathy. Muscle Nerve 2018; 58 (05) 655-659
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pugdahl K, Beniczky S, Wanscher B. , et al. Neurophysiological localisation of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: validation of diagnostic criteria developed by a taskforce of the Danish society of clinical neurophysiology. Clin Neurophysiol 2017; 128 (11) 2205-2210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Landau ME, Diaz MI, Barner KC, Campbell WW. Changes in nerve conduction velocity across the elbow due to experimental error. Muscle Nerve 2002; 26 (06) 838-840
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Logigian EL, Villanueva R, Twydell PT. , et al. Electrodiagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (Une): a Bayesian approach. Muscle Nerve 2014; 49 (03) 337-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Robinson LR, Micklesen PJ, Wang L. Optimizing the number of tests for carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2000; 23 (12) 1880-1882
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Academy of Neurology, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Practice parameter for electrodiagnostic studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: summary statement. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Academy of Neurology, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Muscle Nerve 1999; 22 (03) 408-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Merlevede K, Theys P, van Hees J. Diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy: a new approach. Muscle Nerve 2000; 23 (04) 478-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Buschbacher RM, Bayindir O, Malec J, Akyuz G. Ulnar motor study to first dorsal interosseous: best reference electrode position and normative data. Muscle Nerve 2015; 52 (02) 231-233
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chen S, Andary M, Buschbacher R. , et al. Electrodiagnostic reference values for upper and lower limb nerve conduction studies in adult populations. Muscle Nerve 2016; 54 (03) 371-377
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Di Virgilio G, Grapperon AM, Fayerstein J. , et al. Ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: reappraisal of the wrist-upper arm latency difference between ulnar and median nerves. Clin Neurophysiol 2020; 131 (02) 372-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Robinson LR, Micklesen PJ, Wang L. Strategies for analyzing nerve conduction data: superiority of a summary index over single tests. Muscle Nerve 1998; 21 (09) 1166-1171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar