The role of imaging in focal neuropathies.

Electrodiagnostic testing (EDX) has been the diagnostic tool of choice in peripheral nerve disease for many years, but in recent years, peripheral nerve imaging has been used ever more frequently in daily clinical practice. Nerve ultrasound and magnetic resonance (MR) neurography are able to visualize nerve structures reliably. These techniques can aid in localizing nerve pathology and can reveal significant anatomical abnormalities underlying nerve pathology that may have been otherwise undetected by EDX. As such, nerve ultrasound and MR neurography can significantly improve diagnostic accuracy and can have a significant effect on treatment strategy. In this chapter, the basic principles and recent developments of these techniques will be discussed, as well as their potential application in several types of peripheral nerve disease, such as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE), radial neuropathy, brachial and lumbosacral plexopathy, neuralgic amyotrophy (NA), fibular, tibial, sciatic, femoral neuropathy, meralgia paresthetica, peripheral nerve trauma, tumors, and inflammatory neuropathies.

Nerve ultrasound for diagnosing chronic inflammatory neuropathy: A multicenter validation study.

OBJECTIVE: To validate the diagnostic accuracy of a previously described short sonographic protocol to identify chronic inflammatory neuropathy (CIN), including chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), Lewis Sumner syndrome, and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN), and to determine the added value of nerve ultrasound to detect treatment-responsive patients compared to nerve conduction studies (NCS) in a prospective multicenter study. METHODS: We included 100 consecutive patients clinically suspected of CIN in 3 centers. The study protocol consisted of neurologic examination, laboratory tests, NCS, and nerve ultrasound. We validated a short sonographic protocol (median nerve at forearm, upper arm, and C5 nerve root) and determined its diagnostic accuracy using the European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society criteria of CIDP/MMN (reference standard). In addition, to determine the added value of nerve ultrasound in detecting treatment-responsive patients, we used previously published diagnostic criteria based on clinical, NCS, and sonographic findings and treatment response (alternative reference standard). RESULTS: Sensitivity and specificity of the sonographic protocol for CIN according to the reference standard were 87.4% and 67.3%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of this protocol according to the alternative reference standard were 84.6% and 72.8%, respectively, and of NCS 76.1% and 93.4%. With addition of nerve ultrasound, 44 diagnoses of CIN were established compared to 33 diagnoses with NCS alone. CONCLUSIONS: A short sonographic protocol shows high diagnostic accuracy for detecting CIN. Nerve ultrasound is able to detect up to 25% more patients who respond to treatment. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This multicenter study provides Class IV evidence that nerve ultrasound improves diagnosis of CIN.

Nerve ultrasound in neurofibromatosis type 1: A follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate development of sonographic abnormalities and applications of high-resolution ultrasonography (HRUS) in neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). METHODS: Sixteen asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic NF1 patients underwent HRUS at inclusion and 1 year follow-up. Upper and lower extremity nerves were investigated. Peripheral nerve involvement was graded. RESULTS: Plexiform neurofibromas (PNFs) were found in 7 patients (43.8%) at inclusion and 10 (62.5%) at follow-up. All initially identified PNFs were also found at follow-up; additional PNFs were found by extended longitudinal assessment at follow-up. All 3 patients with minor and 7 patients with severe peripheral nerve involvement had similar involvement at follow-up. Mean nerve size change was -0.2 mm2 (±1.6) and 0.3 mm2 (±6.2) in patients with minor and severe involvement. Mean PNF size change was -0.1 mm2 (±9.9). CONCLUSIONS: HRUS allows qualitative assessment of peripheral nerves, which makes it advantageous as initial imaging technique in suspected neuropathy. Patients with minimal nerve involvement remained so, and might therefore require less follow-up for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNSTs) development. Measured change in PNF size was highly variable. Repeating an extensive standardized HRUS protocol during follow-up thus seems less useful to screen for MPNSTs. SIGNIFICANCE: HRUS has potential applications as diagnostic and screening tool in NF1.

Nerve ultrasound shows subclinical peripheral nerve involvement in neurofibromatosis type 2.

INTRODUCTION: Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) is mainly associated with central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Peripheral nerve involvement is described in symptomatic patients, but evidence of subclinical peripheral nerve involvement is scarce. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional pilot study in 2 asymptomatic and 3 minimally symptomatic patients with NF2 to detect subclinical peripheral nerve involvement. Patients underwent clinical examination, nerve conduction studies (NCS), and high-resolution ultrasonography (HRUS). RESULTS: A total of 30 schwannomas were found, divided over 20 nerve segments (33.9% of all investigated nerve segments). All patients had at least 1 schwannoma. Schwannomas were identified with HRUS in 37% of clinically unaffected nerve segments and 50% of nerve segments with normal NCS findings. DISCUSSION: HRUS shows frequent subclinical peripheral nerve involvement in NF2. Clinicians should consider peripheral nerve involvement as a cause of weakness and sensory loss in the extremities in patients with this disease. Muscle Nerve 57: 312-316, 2018.

Nerve ultrasound: A useful screening tool for peripheral nerve sheath tumors in NF1?

OBJECTIVE: To determine ultrasonographic peripheral nerve involvement in patients with asymptomatic neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). METHODS: Thirteen asymptomatic and 4 minimally symptomatic patients with NF1 were included in this cross-sectional pilot study to detect asymptomatic abnormalities of the brachial plexus and upper and lower extremity nerves. Patients underwent clinical examination, nerve conduction studies (NCS), and high-resolution ultrasonography (HRUS). RESULTS: HRUS showed abnormalities in 16 patients (94.1%). Neurofibromas were identified in 10 patients (58.8%): localized neurofibromas were found in 3 patients (17.6%), plexiform neurofibromas in 3 (17.6%), and both in 4 (23.5%). In 6 patients (35.3%), only nerve enlargement without an abnormal fascicular pattern was observed. Severe involvement of the peripheral nervous system with multiple plexiform neurofibromas was observed in 7 patients (41.2%), while 4 patients (23.5%) had no or only minor involvement. Both NCS and HRUS were performed on 73 individual nerve segments. In 5.5%, abnormalities were found with both tests; in 50.7%, only with HRUS; and in 1.4%, only with NCS. CONCLUSIONS: HRUS frequently showed subclinical involvement of the peripheral nerves in NF1, also when NCS were normal. HRUS findings ranged from normal to widespread peripheral nerve involvement. Because the presence of plexiform neurofibromas and the benign tumor load are risk factors for the development of a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, HRUS may be a useful tool to identify a subgroup of patients who could benefit from regular follow-up.