David N. Herrmann

Pain associated with multiple sclerosis : Systematic review and proposed classification

&NA; Pain is common in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), but estimates of its prevalence have varied widely. The literature describing pain in MS patients spans four decades and has employed a range of different methodologies. We undertook a systematic review in order to summarize current understanding of the association between MS and pain and provide a basis for the design and interpretation of future studies. The point prevalence of pain in patients with MS is nearly 50%, and approximately 75% of patients report having had pain within one month of assessment. Pain adversely affects most aspects of health‐related quality of life, including functional domains such as the ability to work. The presence of pain in patients with MS is associated with increased age, duration of illness, depression, degree of functional impairment, and fatigue. Several different types of pain are found in patients with MS, including extremity pain, trigeminal neuralgia, Lhermitte’s sign, painful tonic spasms, back pain, and headache. Putative mechanisms of pain in patients with MS are discussed, and a classification of pain in MS is proposed. Few randomized clinical trials of treatments for MS pain have been conducted, and the limitations of current knowledge regarding approaches for treating MS pain are discussed. Suggestions for future studies that would increase understanding of the natural history, mechanisms, and treatment of pain in patients with MS are presented.

Epidermal nerve fiber density and sural nerve morphometry in peripheral neuropathies.

Objective: To study intraepidermal nerve fiber (IENF) density in distal leg skin biopsies, sural nerve morphometry, electrophysiology, and clinical features in patients with peripheral neuropathies. Methods: We studied 26 patients with neuropathic complaints who had undergone clinical evaluation, nerve conduction studies, distal leg skin biopsy, and sural nerve biopsy. We quantified densities of IENF and of myelinated and unmyelinated fibers in the sural nerve. Associations among skin and sural nerve morphometric measures and sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitudes were examined nonparametrically. Morphometric measures were examined with respect to diagnostic category of neuropathy. Results: IENF density correlated with the densities of sural nerve total myelinated (r = 0.57, p = 0.0011), small myelinated (r = 0.53, p = 0.0029), and large myelinated fibers (r = 0.49, p = 0.0054). There was a trend toward an association between IENF and sural nerve unmyelinated fiber densities (r = 0.32, p = 0.054). Sural SNAP amplitude and large myelinated fiber densities were highly correlated (r = 0.87, p < 0.0001). IENF density and sural nerve small fiber measures were concordant in 73% of patients. Reduced IENF density was the only indicator of small fiber depletion in 23% of cases. It was usually normal in acquired demyelinating neuropathies and where clinical suspicion for neuropathy was low. Conclusions: Distal leg Intraepidermal nerve (IENF) density may be more sensitive than sural nerve biopsy in identifying small fiber sensory neuropathies. Assessments of IENF density and large fiber measures on biopsy and electrophysiology are both useful for characterizing sensory and sensorimotor neuropathies.

Practice Parameter: Evaluation of distal symmetric polyneuropathy: Role of autonomic testing, nerve biopsy, and skin biopsy (an evidence-based review) Report of the American Academy of Neurology, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Background: Distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) is the most common variety of neuropathy. Since the evaluation of this disorder is not standardized, the available literature was reviewed to provide evidence-based guidelines regarding the role of autonomic testing, nerve biopsy, and skin biopsy for the assessment of polyneuropathy. Methods: A literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Current Contents was performed to identify the best evidence regarding the evaluation of polyneuropathy published between 1980 and March 2007. Articles were classified according to a four-tiered level of evidence scheme and recommendations were based upon the level of evidence. Results and Recommendations: 1) Autonomic testing should be considered in the evaluation of patients with polyneuropathy to document autonomic nervous system dysfunction (Level B). Such testing should be considered especially for the evaluation of suspected autonomic neuropathy (Level B) and distal small fiber sensory polyneuropathy (SFSN) (Level C). A battery of validated tests is recommended to achieve the highest diagnostic accuracy (Level B). 2) Nerve biopsy is generally accepted as useful in the evaluation of certain neuropathies as in patients with suspected amyloid neuropathy, mononeuropathy multiplex due to vasculitis, or with atypical forms of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). However, the literature is insufficient to provide a recommendation regarding when a nerve biopsy may be useful in the evaluation of DSP (Level U). 3) Skin biopsy is a validated technique for determining intraepidermal nerve fiber density and may be considered for the diagnosis of DSP, particularly SFSN (Level C). There is a need for additional prospective studies to define more exact guidelines for the evaluation of polyneuropathy. AAN = American Academy of Neurology; AANEM = American Academy of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine; AAPM&R = American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; ART = autonomic reflex testing; BRSI = baroreflex sensitivity index; CASS = composite autonomic scoring scale; CIDP = chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy; DSFN = distal small fiber neuropathy; DSP = distal symmetric polyneuropathy; EDx = electrodiagnosis; EFNS = European Federation of Neurological Societies; HRV = heart rate variability; IAN = idiopathic autonomic neuropathy; IENF = intraepidermal nerve fibers; MSNA = muscle sympathetic nerve activity; NCSs = nerve conduction studies; PGP 9.5 = protein-gene-product 9.5; PN = peripheral neuropathy; PRT = blood pressure recovery time; QAE = quantitative autonomic examination; QSART = quantitative sudomotor axon reflex test; QSS = Quality Standards Subcommittee; QST = quantitative sensory testing; SFSN = small fiber sensory polyneuropathy; TST = thermoregulatory sweat testing.

Practice parameter: the evaluation of distal symmetric polyneuropathy: the role of autonomic testing, nerve biopsy, and skin biopsy (an evidence-based review). Report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.

Distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) is the most common variety of neuropathy. Since the evaluation of this disorder is not standardized, the available literature was reviewed to provide evidence‐based guidelines regarding the role of autonomic testing, nerve biopsy and skin biopsy for the assessment of polyneuropathy.

Practice Parameter: Evaluation of distal symmetric polyneuropathy: Role of laboratory and genetic testing (an evidence-based review) Report of the American Academy of Neurology, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Background: Distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) is the most common variety of neuropathy. Since the evaluation of this disorder is not standardized, the available literature was reviewed to provide evidence-based guidelines regarding the role of laboratory and genetic tests for the assessment of DSP. Methods: A literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Current Contents was performed to identify the best evidence regarding the evaluation of polyneuropathy published between 1980 and March 2007. Articles were classified according to a four-tiered level of evidence scheme and recommendations were based upon the level of evidence. Results and Recommendations: 1) Screening laboratory tests may be considered for all patients with polyneuropathy (Level C). Those tests that provide the highest yield of abnormality are blood glucose, serum B12 with metabolites (methylmalonic acid with or without homocysteine), and serum protein immunofixation electrophoresis (Level C). If there is no definite evidence of diabetes mellitus by routine testing of blood glucose, testing for impaired glucose tolerance may be considered in distal symmetric sensory polyneuropathy (Level C). 2) Genetic testing should be conducted for the accurate diagnosis and classification of hereditary neuropathies (Level A). Genetic testing may be considered in patients with cryptogenic polyneuropathy who exhibit a hereditary neuropathy phenotype (Level C). Initial genetic testing should be guided by the clinical phenotype, inheritance pattern, and electrodiagnostic features and should focus on the most common abnormalities which are CMT1A duplication/HNPP deletion, Cx32 (GJB1), and MFN2 mutation screening. There is insufficient evidence to determine the usefulness of routine genetic testing in patients with cryptogenic polyneuropathy who do not exhibit a hereditary neuropathy phenotype (Level U). AAN = American Academy of Neurology; AANEM = American Academy of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine; AAPM&R = American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; CMT = Charcot-Marie-Tooth; DSP = distal symmetric polyneuropathy; EDX = electrodiagnostic; GTT = glucose tolerance testing; IFE = immunofixation electrophoresis; QSS = Quality Standards Subcommittee; SPEP = serum protein electrophoresis.

Reliability of the CMT neuropathy score (second version) in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease

The Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth neuropathy score (CMTNS) is a reliable and valid composite score comprising symptoms, signs, and neurophysiological tests, which has been used in natural history studies of CMT1A and CMT1X and as an outcome measure in treatment trials of CMT1A. Following an international workshop on outcome measures in Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth disease (CMT), the CMTNS was modified to attempt to reduce floor and ceiling effects and to standardize patient assessment, aiming to improve its sensitivity for detecting change over time and the effect of an intervention. After agreeing on the modifications made to the CMTNS (CMTNS2), three examiners evaluated 16 patients to determine inter‐rater reliability; one examiner evaluated 18 patients twice within 8 weeks to determine intra‐rater reliability. Three examiners evaluated 63 patients using the CMTNS and the CMTNS2 to determine how the modifications altered scoring. For inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability, intra‐class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were ≥0.96 for the CMT symptom score and the CMT examination score. There were small but significant differences in some of the individual components of the CMTNS compared with the CMTNS2, mainly in the components that had been modified the most. A longitudinal study is in progress to determine whether the CMTNS2 is more sensitive than the CMTNS for detecting change over time.

Dispersion of the distal compound muscle action potential as a diagnostic criterion for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy

Objective: To assess distal compound muscle action potential (DCMAP) duration as a diagnostic criterion for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). Background: Current electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP have high specificity but limited sensitivity. Prolonged DCMAP duration has been reported in acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. The authors have compared DCMAP duration in patients with CIDP, diabetic polyneuropathy (DP), ALS, and musculoskeletal pain syndrome (MSP) to determine whether it enhances the sensitivity of electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP. Methods: Data from 23 CIDP, 34 DP, 34 ALS, and 54 MSP patients were reviewed. The time interval between onset of the first negative peak and return to baseline of the last negative peak of the DCMAP was calculated for each nerve. To distinguish CIDP from DP, ALS, and MSP, optimal cutoff values for DCMAP duration were achieved with receiver-operating characteristic curves. The sensitivity and specificity of these cutoff values were compared with each of four sets of electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP. Results: Mean DCMAP duration in CIDP was significantly longer than in DP, ALS, and MSP. The sensitivity of existing electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP ranged between 0.43 and 0.61. Their specificity vs DP or ALS was 0.91 to 1. Using DCMAP duration of ≥9 milliseconds for any of four motor nerves yielded a sensitivity of 0.78 for CIDP and specificity of 0.94 vs DP or ALS. Adding DCMAP duration criteria to any one of the three accepted criteria enhanced their sensitivity with little sacrifice of specificity. Conclusion: Quantitation of DCMAP dispersion shows promise as a sensitive and specific adjunctive electrodiagnostic criterion for CIDP.

Painful small-fiber neuropathy in Sjögren syndrome

Of 20 consecutive patients with Sjögren neuropathy, 16 (80%) presented with burning feet and 12 (60%) with non-length-dependent sensory symptoms. Leg and thigh skin biopsies, performed in 13 patients, including 7 with normal electrophysiology, showed either reduced epidermal nerve fiber (ENF) density or abnormal morphology. ENF loss was frequently non length dependent, suggesting that patients with this disorder commonly have a small-fiber sensory neuronopathy rather than a “dying-back” axonopathy.

Practice Parameter: The Evaluation of Distal Symmetric Polyneuropathy: The Role ofLaboratory and Genetic Testing (An Evidence-Based Review): Report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Distal symmetric polyneuropathy (DSP) is the most common variety of neuropathy. Since the evaluation of this disorder is not standardized, the available literature was reviewed to provide evidence‐based guidelines regarding the role of laboratory and genetic tests for the assessment of DSP.

Neuropathy progression in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A

Objective: To determine the rate of disease progression in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A). Background: CMT1A is the most common inherited peripheral neuropathy, affecting approximately 1:5,000 people irrespective of ethnic background or gender. There is no cure for CMT1A. Clinical trials are being initiated that use the CMT Neuropathy Score (CMTNS), a composite score based on patient symptoms, signs, and neurophysiologic abnormalities, as the primary outcome variable. The sensitivity of the CMTNS or any other score to change over time, as a measure of CMT1A progression, has yet to be determined. Methods: We determined the CMTNS as well as the Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS) on 72 patients followed for up to 8 years. The rate of disease progression was evaluated for the CMTNS and NIS using mixed effects linear regression models, adjusting for age and gender. Results: Both CMTNS and NIS showed changes over time. The CMTNS increased an average of 0.686 points per year (95% CI 0.461 to 0.911, p ≤ 0.0001). The NIS increased 1.368 points per year on average (95% CI 0.616 to 2.121, p = 0.0005). There was a suggestion that the rate of progression increased with age. Conclusion: Progression of CMT1A can be detected by both the CMT Neuropathy Score (CMTNS) and the Neuropathy Impairment Score (NIS). This supports the feasibility of clinical trials to detect a slowing of disease progression using either or both of these scales as outcome measures. Since the CMTNS combines symptoms, signs, and electrophysiology and the NIS is based solely on the neurologic examination, the two scales may be complementary.