Other formats:
BibTeX
LaTeX
RIS
@article{1213668,
author = {Adamová, Blanka and Kopáčik, Roman and Voháňka, Stanislav and Dušek, Ladislav and Bednařík, Josef},
article_location = {Praha},
article_number = {6},
keywords = {lumbar spinal stenosis; diabetic polyneuropathy; electrophysiological examination; electromyography},
language = {eng},
issn = {1210-7859},
journal = {Česká a Slovenská neurologie a neurochirurgie},
title = {Is Electrophysiology Useful in the Differential Diagnostics of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Diabetic Polyneuropathy?},
volume = {77},
year = {2014}
}
TY - JOUR
ID - 1213668
AU - Adamová, Blanka - Kopáčik, Roman - Voháňka, Stanislav - Dušek, Ladislav - Bednařík, Josef
PY - 2014
TI - Is Electrophysiology Useful in the Differential Diagnostics of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Diabetic Polyneuropathy?
JF - Česká a Slovenská neurologie a neurochirurgie
VL - 77
IS - 6
SP - 684-690
EP - 684-690
PB - Česká lékařská společnost J.E. Purkyně
SN - 12107859
KW - lumbar spinal stenosis
KW - diabetic polyneuropathy
KW - electrophysiological examination
KW - electromyography
N2 - Aim: To evaluate validity of electrophysiological examination in the differential diagnostics of lumbar spinal stenosis (LS) and diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN). Methods: Electrophysiological parameters were examined in 68 patients with clinically symptomatic LS, in 28 patients with DPN, and in a group of 32 healthy volunteers. Results: Electrophysiological parameters evaluated from the upper extremities (F-wave latency of the ulnar nerve and radial SNAP amplitude), all the latencies measured in the lower extremities (tibial F-wave, soleus H-reflex and spinal latency of MEP), and the sural SNAP amplitude contributed significantly to distinguishing the LS from DPN patients. ROC analysis, however, disclosed only two electrophysiological parameters as effective in independent discrimination between the LS and DPN patient groups: ulnar F-wave latency (cut-off point at 24.2 ms, sensitivity 82.7% and specificity 63.9%); and radial SNAP amplitude (cut-off point at 10.5 µV, sensitivity 75.5%, specificity 58.2%). Multivariate discrimination provided a canonical score with the most powerful predictive value of all. Conclusions: Electrophysiological examination evaluated from the upper extremities proved very useful in the differential diagnostics of LS and DPN, but the most powerful predictive value was obtained by using a canonical score involving several electrophysiological parameters.
ER -
ADAMOVÁ, Blanka, Roman KOPÁČIK, Stanislav VOHÁŇKA, Ladislav DUŠEK and Josef BEDNAŘÍK. Is Electrophysiology Useful in the Differential Diagnostics of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Diabetic Polyneuropathy? \textit{Česká a Slovenská neurologie a neurochirurgie}. Praha: Česká lékařská společnost J.E. Purkyně, 2014, vol.~77, No~6, p.~684-690. ISSN~1210-7859.
|
