Axonal Excitability Does Not Differ between Painful and Painless Diabetic or Chemotherapy-Induced Distal Symmetrical Polyneuropathy in a Multicenter Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: Axonal excitability reflects ion channel function, and it is proposed that this may be a biomarker in painful (vs painless) polyneuropathy. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between axonal excitability parameters and chronic neuropathic pain in deeply phenotyped cohorts with diabetic or chemotherapy-induced distal symmetrical polyneuropathy. METHODS: Two hundred thirty-nine participants with diabetic polyneuropathy were recruited from sites in the UK and Denmark, and 39 participants who developed chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy were recruited from Denmark. Participants were separated into those with probable or definite neuropathic pain and those without neuropathic pain. Axonal excitability of large myelinated fibers was measured with the threshold tracking technique. The stimulus site was the median nerve, and the recording sites were the index finger (sensory studies) and abductor pollicis brevis muscle (motor studies). RESULTS: Participants with painless and painful polyneuropathy were well matched across clinical variables. Sensory and motor axonal excitability measures, including recovery cycle, threshold electrotonus, strength-duration time constant, and current-threshold relationship, did not show differences between participants with painful and painless diabetic polyneuropathy, and there were only minor changes for chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy. INTERPRETATION: Axonal excitability did not significantly differ between painful and painless diabetic or chemotherapy-induced polyneuropathy in a multicenter observational study. Threshold tracking assesses the excitability of myelinated axons; the majority of nociceptors are unmyelinated, and although there is some overlap of the "channelome" between these axonal populations, our results suggest that alternative measures such as microneurography are required to understand the relationship between sensory neuron excitability and neuropathic pain. ANN NEUROL 2022;91:506-520.

Painful and non-painful diabetic neuropathy, diagnostic challenges and implications for future management.

Peripheral neuropathy is one of the most common complications of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Up to half of patients with diabetes develop neuropathy during the course of their disease, which is accompanied by neuropathic pain in 30-40% of cases. Peripheral nerve injury in diabetes can manifest as progressive distal symmetric polyneuropathy, autonomic neuropathy, radiculo-plexopathies, and mononeuropathies. The most common diabetic neuropathy is distal symmetric polyneuropathy, which we will refer to as DN, with its characteristic glove and stocking like presentation of distal sensory or motor function loss. DN or its painful counterpart, painful DN, are associated with increased mortality and morbidity; thus, early recognition and preventive measures are essential. Nevertheless, it is not easy to diagnose DN or painful DN, particularly in patients with early and mild neuropathy, and there is currently no single established diagnostic gold standard. The most common diagnostic approach in research is a hierarchical system, which combines symptoms, signs, and a series of confirmatory tests. The general lack of long-term prospective studies has limited the evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of new morphometric and neurophysiological techniques. Thus, the best paradigm for screening DN and painful DN both in research and in clinical practice remains uncertain. Herein, we review the diagnostic challenges from both clinical and research perspectives and their implications for managing patients with DN. There is no established DN treatment, apart from improved glycaemic control, which is more effective in type 1 than in type 2 diabetes, and only symptomatic management is available for painful DN. Currently, less than one-third of patients with painful DN derive sufficient pain relief with existing pharmacotherapies. A more precise and distinct sensory profile from patients with DN and painful DN may help identify responsive patients to one treatment versus another. Detailed sensory profiles will lead to tailored treatment for patient subgroups with painful DN by matching to novel or established DN pathomechanisms and also for improved clinical trials stratification. Large randomized clinical trials are needed to identify the interventions, i.e. pharmacological, physical, cognitive, educational, etc., which lead to the best therapeutic outcomes.

Axonal swellings are related to type 2 diabetes, but not to distal diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Distal diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP) is a common complication of diabetes with many patients showing a reduction of intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) from skin biopsy, a validated and sensitive diagnostic tool for the assessment of DSP. Axonal swelling ratio is a morphological quantification altered in DSP. It is, however, unclear if axonal swellings are related to diabetes or DSP. The aim of this study was to investigate how axonal swellings in cutaneous nerve fibres are related to type 2 diabetes mellitus, DSP and neuropathic pain in a well-defined cohort of patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 249 participants, from the Pain in Neuropathy Study (UK) and the International Diabetic Neuropathy Consortium (Denmark), underwent a structured neurological examination, nerve conduction studies, quantitative sensory testing and skin biopsy. The study included four groups: healthy control study participants without diabetes (n = 45); participants with type 2 diabetes without DSP (DSP-; n = 31); and participants with evidence of DSP (DSP+; n = 173); the last were further separated into painless DSP+ (n = 74) and painful DSP+ (n = 99). Axonal swellings were defined as enlargements on epidermal-penetrating fibres exceeding 1.5 µm in diameter. Axonal swelling ratio is calculated by dividing the number of axonal swellings by the number of intraepidermal nerve fibres. RESULTS: Median (IQR) IENFD (fibres/mm) was: 6.7 (5.2-9.2) for healthy control participants; 6.2 (4.4-7.3) for DSP-; 1.3 (0.5-2.2) for painless DSP+; and 0.84 (0.4-1.6) for painful DSP+. Swelling ratios were calculated for all participants and those with IENFD > 1.0 fibre/mm. When only those participants with IENFD > 1.0 fibre/mm were included, the axonal swelling ratio was higher in participants with type 2 diabetes when compared with healthy control participants (p < 0.001); however, there was no difference between DSP- and painless DSP+ participants, or between painless DSP+ and painful DSP+ participants. The axonal swelling ratio correlated weakly with HbA1c (r = 0.16, p = 0.04), but did not correlate with the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (surrogate measure of DSP severity), BMI or type 2 diabetes duration. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In individuals with type 2 diabetes where IENFD is >1.0 fibre/mm, axonal swelling ratio is related to type 2 diabetes but is not related to DSP or painful DSP. Axonal swellings may be an early marker of sensory nerve injury in type 2 diabetes.

Assessing Corneal Confocal Microscopy and Other Small Fiber Measures in Diabetic Polyneuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Damage to small nerve fibers is common in diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN), and the diagnosis of DPN relies on subjective symptoms and signs in a combination with objective confirmatory tests, typically electrophysiology or intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) from skin biopsy. Corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) has been introduced as a tool to detect DPN. However, it is unclear if CCM can reliably be used to diagnose DPN and how the technique compares with other commonly used measures of small fiber damage, such as IENFD, cold detection threshold (CDT), and warm detection threshold (WDT). Therefore, we assessed and compared the use of CCM, IENFD, CDT, and WDT in the diagnosis of DPN in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this cohort study, the participants underwent detailed neurologic examination, electrophysiology, quantification of IENFD, CCM, and quantitative sensory testing. Definition of DPN was made in accordance with the Toronto criteria for diabetic neuropathy (without relying on IENFD and thermal thresholds). RESULTS: A total of 214 patients with at least probable DPN, 63 patients without DPN, and 97 controls without diabetes were included. Patients with DPN had lower CCM measures (corneal nerve fiber length [CNFL], nerve fiber density, and branch density), IENFD, CDT, and WDT compared with patients without DPN (p ≤ 0.001, <0.001, 0.002, p < 0.001, p = 0.003, and <0.005, respectively), whereas there was no difference between controls and patients with diabetes without DPN. All 3 CCM measures showed a very low diagnostic sensitivity with CNFL showing the highest (14.4% [95% CI 9.8-18.4]) and a specificity of 95.7% (88.0-99.1). In comparison, the sensitivity of abnormal CDT and/or WDT was 30.5% (24.4-37.0) with a specificity of 84.9% (74.6-92.2). The sensitivity of abnormal IENFD was highest among all measures with a value of 51.1% (43.7-58.5) and a specificity of 90% (79.5-96.2). CCM measures did not correlate with IENFD, CDT/WDT, or neuropathy severity in the group of patients with DPN. DISCUSSION: CCM measures showed the lowest sensitivity compared with other small fiber measures in the diagnosis of DPN. This indicates that CCM is not a sensitive method to detect DPN in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that CCM measures aid in the detection of DPN in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetics but with a low sensitivity when compared with other small fiber measures.

Test-retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel-Seiffer tuning fork.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyneuropathy is a common neurological disorder with many potential causes. An essential part in screening, diagnosis, and follow-up evaluation of polyneuropathy is testing of the sensory function including vibratory sensation. The graduated Rydel-Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have been developed to quantify vibratory sensation through detection thresholds. The aim of this study is to compare the vibration detection thresholds determined by the two instruments regarding intraindividual temporal changes, interindividual variation in healthy subjects and comparison of the diagnostic value in patients with a clinical suspicion of polyneuropathy. METHODS: Ninety-four healthy subjects, 98 patients with and 97 patients without a diagnosis of polyneuropathy were included. Quantitative sensory testing including biothesiometry, structured clinical examination, and nerve conduction studies were performed three times during 52 weeks in healthy subjects and once in patients. RESULTS: There were no significant changes over time for neither the Rydel-Seiffer tuning fork nor the biothesiometer, and both had larger between-subject variation than within-subject variation. Relative intertrial variability was largest for the biothesiometer. Diagnostic value (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) was moderate for both methods (Rydel-Seiffer tuning fork: 58%, 74%, 70%, 64%; biothesiometer: 47%, 77%, 68%, 59%). INTERPRETATION: The Rydel-Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have a low test-retest and time dependent variation. They perform almost equally as diagnostic tools in patients with suspected polyneuropathy with a tendency toward better performance of the tuning fork.

Normative reference values for the dorsal sural nerve derived from a large multicenter cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Dorsal sural nerve conduction studies (NCS) may increase the sensitivity for the diagnosis of polyneuropathy, but clinical use is limited by a lack of reliable normative reference values in all age-groups. The aim of our study was to develop reference values for the dorsal sural nerve, based on a large multicenter cohort of healthy subjects. METHODS: Bilateral antidromic NCS were performed using standard surface electrodes in 229 healthy subjects (aged 21-80 years; median: 54 years). We assessed the normality of data distribution for amplitudes and conduction velocity (CV) and for their logarithmic (ln) transformation. The effects of age and height were determined using linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Sensory potentials were present in all subjects. Logarithmically transformed data were normally distributed. Age2 and height were most significantly associated with amplitude, and age and height with CV, respectively. There was no significant side-difference. Mean amplitudes (right and left) were 4.8 and 4.9 µV and mean CV 46.7 and 46.9 m/s. Reference limits were e (3.712515 - 0.0000956 * age2 - 0.0115883 * height ±â€¯1.96 * 0.51137) for amplitude and e (4.354374 - 0.0021081 * age - 0.0023354 * height ±â€¯1.96 * 0.11161) for CV. CONCLUSIONS: Dorsal sural nerve NCS are robust and have well defined normative limits. SIGNIFICANCE: The findings provide a basis for more sensitive NCS in clinical practice and future studies of the diagnostic accuracy of NCS in polyneuropathy.

Metabolic Factors, Lifestyle Habits, and Possible Polyneuropathy in Early Type 2 Diabetes: A Nationwide Study of 5,249 Patients in the Danish Centre for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes (DD2) Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association of metabolic and lifestyle factors with possible diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and neuropathic pain in patients with early type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We thoroughly characterized 6,726 patients with recently diagnosed diabetes. After a median of 2.8 years, we sent a detailed questionnaire on neuropathy, including the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq), to identify possible DPN (score ≥4) and the Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4) questionnaire for possible associated neuropathic pain (MNSIq ≥4 + pain in both feet + DN4 score ≥3). RESULTS: Among 5,249 patients with data on both DPN and pain, 17.9% (n = 938) had possible DPN, including 7.4% (n = 386) with possible neuropathic pain. In regression analyses, central obesity (waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, and waist-to-height ratio) was markedly associated with DPN. Other important metabolic factors associated with DPN included hypertriglyceridemia ≥1.7 mmol/L, adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) 1.36 (95% CI 1.17; 1.59); decreased HDL cholesterol <1.0/1.2 mmol/L (male/female), aPR 1.35 (95% CI 1.12; 1.62); hs-CRP ≥3.0 mg/L, aPR 1.66 (95% CI 1.42; 1.94); C-peptide ≥1,550 pmol/L, aPR 1.72 (95% CI 1.43; 2.07); HbA1c ≥78 mmol/mol, aPR 1.42 (95% CI 1.06; 1.88); and antihypertensive drug use, aPR 1.34 (95% CI 1.16; 1.55). Smoking, aPR 1.50 (95% CI 1.24; 1.81), and lack of physical activity (0 vs. ≥3 days/week), aPR 1.61 (95% CI 1.39; 1.85), were also associated with DPN. Smoking, high alcohol intake, and failure to increase activity after diabetes diagnosis associated with neuropathic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Possible DPN was associated with metabolic syndrome factors, insulin resistance, inflammation, and modifiable lifestyle habits in early type 2 diabetes.