4.6 Article

Stimulated skin wrinkling for predicting intraepidermal nerve fibre density

Journal

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
Volume 120, Issue 5, Pages 953-958

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2009.03.011

Keywords

Nerve fibers; Unmyelinated; Sensory and autonomic neuropathies; Skin wrinkling; Intraepidermal nerve fibre density; Water immersion wrinkling; Small nerve fibre neuropathy; EMLA

Funding

  1. national medical research council, Singapore [466/2000]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the usefulness of stimulated skin wrinkling using EMLA and water immersion in detecting abnormal intraepidermal nerve fibre density. Methods: In a prospective study of patients with predominantly sensory polyneuropathy, we tested sensitivity and specificity of stimulated skin wrinkling using EMLA and water immersion in detecting abnormal intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD). Results: EMLA stimulated wrinkling showed a sensitivity of 81.6% and specificity of 74.7% in detecting abnormal IENFD and water wrinkling a sensitivity of 71.4% and specificity of 73%. The positive and negative predictive values for detecting abnormal IENFD were 88.3% and 63.3% for EMLA wrinkling, for water wrinkling 83.3% and 57.4%. Intra-observer EMLA score variability was good with no change in assignment of wrinkling and inter-observer score variability resulted in 1-5 changes in wrinkling score which translated into a change of the wrinkling Status from normal to abnormal on two occasions. Conclusions: Stimulated skin wrinkling correlates well with abnormal intraepidermal nerve fibre density. Significance: Our study suggests that EMLA induced stimulated skin wrinkling is a useful alternative parameter for predicting abnormal intraepidermal nerve fibre density. (C) 2009 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available