Meralgia paresthetica.

Meralgia paresthetica is a common but probably underrecognized syndrome caused by dysfunction of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. The diagnosis is based on the patient's description of sensory disturbance, often painful, on the anterolateral aspect of the thigh, with normal strength and reflexes. Sensory nerve conduction studies and somatosensory evoked potentials may be used to support the diagnosis, but both have technical limitations, with low specificity and sensitivity. Risk factors for meralgia paresthetica include obesity, tight clothing, and diabetes mellitus. Some cases are complications of hip or lumbar spine surgery. Most cases are self-limited, but a small proportion of patients remain with refractory and disabling symptoms. Treatment options include medications for neuropathic pain, neurolysis, neurectomy, and radioablation, but controlled trials to compare efficacy are lacking.

Meralgia Paresthetica: Relevance, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Pain and sensory disturbance in the distribution of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve in the ventrolateral portion of the thigh is called meralgia paresthetica (MP). The incidence of MP has risen along with the increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus and was recently estimated at 32 new cases per 100 000 persons per year. In this review, we provide an overview of current standards and developments in the diagnosis and treatment of MP. METHODS: This review is based on publications retrieved by a selective literature search, with special attention to meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized and controlled trials (RCTs), and prospective observational studies. RESULTS: The diagnosis is mainly based on typical symptoms combined with a positive response to an infiltration procedure. In atypical cases, electrophysiological testing, neurosonography, and magnetic resonance imaging can be helpful in establishing the diagnosis. The literature search did not reveal any studies of high quality. Four prospective observational studies with small case numbers and partly inconsistent results are available. In a meta-analysis of 149 cases, pain relief was described after infiltration in 85% of cases and after surgery in 80%, with 1-38 months of follow-up. In another meta-analysis of 670 cases, there was pain relief after infiltration in 22% of cases, after surgical decompression in 63%, and after neurectomy in 85%. Hardly any data are available on more recent treatment options, such as radiofrequency therapy, spinal cord stimulation, or peripheral nerve stimulation. CONCLUSION: The state of the evidence is limited in both quantity and quality, corresponding to evidence level 2a for surgical and non-surgical methods. Advances in imaging and neurophysiological testing have made the diagnosis easier to establish. When intervention is needed, good success rates have been achieved with surgery (decompression, neurectomy), and variable success rates with infiltration.

Effectiveness of the muscle energy technique on postpartum meralgia paresthetica: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of the muscle energy technique (MET) on postpartum meralgia paresthetica (MP) affecting the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of the MET on postpartum MP affecting the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 30 patients with postpartum MP were randomly allocated to study and control groups. The study group received the MET with conventional therapeutic exercises and the control group received the conventional exercises alone for four weeks (thrice a week, for 30-40 minutes duration). Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve distal latency, pain intensity, response to the prone knee bend (PKB) test and pelvic compression test were assessed. RESULTS: Patients allocated to the MET group had improvements compared to the controls in pain intensity (MD: -1.66, 95%CI -2.39 to -0.94), distal latency (MD: -0.66, 95%CI -0.94 to -0.36), and knee range of motion in the PKB test (MD: 19.5∘, 95%CI 13 to 26.1) with high treatment effects, Cohen's d -ES = 1.71, 1.86 and 2.24 respectively. However, there was no between-group difference for the pelvic compression test (p= 0.41). CONCLUSION: The MET can reduce pain, distal latency, and increase the prone knee range of motion in women with MP affecting the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve.

Treatment of idiopathic meralgia paresthetica - is there reliable evidence yet?

OBJECTIVE: Meralgia paresthetica is a common condition that is usually diagnosed by its classical clinical presentation and by exclusion of a spinal origin of pain, sensory loss, and/or paresthesias in the anterolateral thigh. Treatment modalities include conservative management, local injections, and surgical therapy. To date, no level 1 evidence exists about treatment options for idiopathic meralgia paresthetica. This review article aims to give a structured overview of epidemiology, history, anatomy, diagnostics, and treatment. It focuses on the existing literature and current developments in clinical management. METHODS: A literature search on PubMed/MEDLINE was performed on 20 December 2021, yielding 1412 results. Abstracts were screened and classified in terms of epidemiology, anatomy, diagnostics, and treatment. RESULTS: High-quality observational data that was included in recent meta-analyses showed satisfactory results for conservative management, injections, and surgical decompression or neurectomy, but there is some major methodological criticism. For idiopathic meralgia paresthetica, the results of surgical decompression have never been compared to those of neurectomy in a randomized setup. The only study protocol published so far does not consider any extended decompression techniques (dynamic, circumferent, proximal, and distal to the inguinal ligament). A multicenter, prospective design has never been proposed. DISCUSSION: Reliable high-quality evidence on the treatment of idiopathic meralgia paresthetica is lacking at the current state, and challenges in clinical decision-making remain.

Estimulación medular como tratamiento de la meralgia parestésica. ¿Es factible? Reporte de caso / Spinal cord stimulation to treat meralgia paresthetica. Is it feasible? A case report

La meralgia parestésica es un desorden neurológico causado por una neuropatía del nervio femorocutáneo lateral. Su etiología puede ser idiopática o iatrogénica. Se caracteriza por dolor, parestesias y entumecimiento en la cara anterolateral del muslo. Su diagnóstico es básicamente clínico, aunque pueden ser útiles pruebas de imagen o neurofisiológicas. A pesar de que el tratamiento conservador suele ser eficaz en la mayoría de los pacientes, existen casos refractarios que pueden precisar de otras formas de tratamiento. Los procedimientos quirúrgicos disponibles son la descompresión nerviosa (neurólisis) o la sección (neurectomía) y las ablaciones por radiofrecuencia. Presentamos un caso de meralgia parestésica invalidante refractaria en el cual empleamos la estimulación medular como posible técnica eficaz en el alivio del dolor y poder evitar la realización de una neurectomía del nervio femorocutáneo lateral (AU)

Meralgia paresthetica is a neurological disorder caused by a neuropathy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Its etiology can be spontaneous or iatrogenic. It is characterized by pain, paresthesia, and numbness in the anterolateral aspect of the thigh. Diagnosis is based on clinical examination, although image and neurophysiological tests can be useful as well. Despite conservative measures use to be effective in most of patients, refractory cases can benefit from alternative treatments. Available surgical procedures are: nerve decompression (neurolysis) or section (neurectomy) and radiofrequency ablation. We present a case of refractory meralgia paresthetica where spinal cord stimulation was used as a possible effective technique in pain relief and to avoid the neurectomy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (AU)

Meralgia Paresthetica.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review article summaries the epidemiology, etiology, clinical presentations, and latest treatment modalities of meralgia paresthetica, including the latest data about peripheral and spinal cord stimulation therapy. Meralgia paresthetica (MP) causes burning, stinging, or numbness in the anterolateral part of the thigh, usually due to compression of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN). RECENT FINDINGS: There are emerging data regarding the benefit of interventional pain procedures, including steroid injection and radiofrequency ablation, and other interventions including spinal cord and peripheral nerve stimulation reserved for refractory cases. The strength of evidence for treatment choices in meralgia paraesthetica is weak. Some observational studies are comparing local injection of corticosteroid versus surgical interventions. However, more extensive studies are needed regarding the long-term benefit of peripheral and spinal cord stimulation therapy.

Spinal cord stimulation to treat meralgia paresthetica. Is it feasible? A case report.

Meralgia paresthetica is a neurological disorder caused by a neuropathy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. Its aetiology can be spontaneous or iatrogenic. It is characterized by pain, paresthesia, and numbness in the anterolateral aspect of the thigh. Diagnosis is based on clinical examination, although image and neurophysiological tests can be useful as well. Despite conservative measures use to be effective in most of patients, refractory cases can benefit from alternative treatments. Available surgical procedures are: nerve decompression (neurolysis) or section (neurectomy) and radiofrequency ablation. We present a case of refractory meralgia paresthetica where spinal cord stimulation was used as a possible effective technique in pain relief and to avoid the neurectomy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve.

Successful application of spinal cord stimulation in a patient with refractory bilateral meralgia paresthetica.

We present a 38-year-old morbidly obese male who presented with functionally limiting bilateral anterior thigh pain consistent with meralgia paresthetica. His symptoms had been unresponsive to conservative measures which included physical therapy, oral medications and multiple nerve blocks. Patient underwent a trial of spinal cord stimulation (SCS), experiencing 70% of pain relief. He then underwent permanent SCS implant. At subsequent follow-ups 3 and 6 months later, he continued to report 70% improvement of his pain, as well as improved function and quality of life. To our knowledge, this is only the second reported case of successful treatment of meralgia paresthetica with SCS, and the first in a morbidly obese patient.

We report a case of a 38-year-old obese male who presented with meralgia paresthetica, a condition characterized by abnormal sensation and nerve pain to the outer aspect of the thigh, limiting his ability to perform activities of daily living. His pain was unresponsive to multiple treatment options such as physical therapy, oral medications and a series of injections with local anesthetic and corticosteroid medications. We then proceeded with spinal cord stimulation, which consists of implanting a device that provides low levels of electrical current to the spinal cord, in hopes of alleviating his pain. After implantation of the device, at 3- and 6-month follow-ups, he was able to achieve 70% improvement of his pain, with the ability to perform his daily activities. This is the second case reported of the use of spinal cord stimulation for this type of condition.

Preoperative Ultrasound in Patients with Meralgia Paresthetica to Detect Anatomical Variations in the Course of the Lateral Femoral Cutaneous Nerve.

OBJECTIVE: Sometimes during surgery for meralgia paresthetica, it can be difficult to find the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN). The aims of this study were to study the prevalence of different anatomical variations in patients, compare preoperative ultrasound (US) data with intraoperative findings, and investigate the effect of type of anatomical variation on duration of surgery and success rate of localizing the LFCN. METHODS: Fifty-four consecutive patients with idiopathic meralgia paresthetica who underwent either a neurolysis or neurectomy procedure were included. All patients preoperatively underwent US of the LFCN. Anatomical variations were categorized into type A, B, C, D, and E using the classification of Aszmann and Dellon. The cross-sectional area of the LFCN at the inguinal ligament and the distance of the LFCN to the anterior superior iliac spine were noted. Correlations with intraoperative findings were investigated, as well as the effect on duration of surgery and success rate of finding the LFCN. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Likert scale. RESULTS: The most frequent anatomical variant was type B (79%), followed by type C (9%), D (5%), and E (7%). No type A was encountered. Correlation between preoperative US and intraoperative findings was 100%. During surgery, the LFCN could be identified in all cases. Duration of surgery did not significantly vary for the different anatomical variants. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative US is reliable in detecting anatomical variations of LFCN. This information can be very helpful in identifying the LFCN more frequently and easily during surgery, especially in more medial variants.

Spontaneous iliacus haematoma with femoral nerve palsy: an appeal to involve surgical teams early.

We report the case of a 68-year-old man who was placed on heparin as bridge therapy and subsequently developed an iliacus haematoma with associated femoral nerve palsy. His team involved the orthopaedic surgery team in delayed fashion after his symptom onset. Due to his active medical conditions, he did not undergo surgical decompression of his haematoma until late into his hospital course. Unfortunately, this patient did not regain meaningful function from his femoral nerve deficit. We believe this case highlights the high index of suspicion necessary for making this diagnosis as well as the repercussions of an untimely decompression for this acute, compressive neuropathy. Although we are surgeons and this is a surgical case, we hope to publish this case in a medical journal to raise awareness that surgical decompression does have a role in this diagnosis and should ultimately be pursued early in its course for optimal patient benefit.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation: A New Treatment for Meralgia Paresthetica.

BACKGROUND: Meralgia paresthetica is a condition caused by entrapment of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve that leads to paresthesia along the anterolateral portion of the thigh. Because of advancements in neuromodulation, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been considered a new treatment option for meralgia paresthetica. Newer PNS technology targets peripheral nerves directly yet in a minimally invasive manner. We report a case in which a PNS device provided more than 12 months of complete pain relief in a patient with meralgia paresthetica and helped the patient avoid a neurolysis procedure. CASE PRESENTATION: A 57-year-old male presented to clinic with a 6-year history of "painful numbness [and] burning" along the right lateral thigh. He rated his pain as 8 out of 10, which decreased to a rating of 2 out of 10 with the use of gabapentin, but unwanted side effects motivated him to seek alternative treatment. On the basis of his history, physical exam, and imaging results, he was diagnosed with meralgia paresthetica. He was offered neurolysis; however, after seeing a pain specialist, he agreed to the implantation of a SPRINT peripheral nerve stimulator. After the implantation procedure, his pain reduced to 0 out of 10, and his quality of life improved, with better sleep and less somnolence. The device was removed after 60 days, as planned. He continued to have complete resolution of pain at 12 months after the date of device implantation. CONCLUSION: With recent advancements, PNS can be used to treat meralgia paresthetica in an effective yet minimally invasive manner. As newer PNS technology becomes more familiar to physicians and pain specialists, it is likely to be used as a mainstay treatment for meralgia paresthetica.

Severe Postpartum Femoral Neuropathy: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Femoral neuropathy is a rare complication of vaginal delivery that is often under-reported. It is marked by weakness and sensory loss in the lower limbs. This report presents 3 cases to outline possible prevention strategies, as well as to describe the process of diagnosis, management, and recovery for this injury. CASES: Diagnosis is made clinically, and prognosis is determined by clinical follow-up along with nerve conduction studies and electromyography. Management involves interdisciplinary efforts with physiotherapy. Prevention includes frequent repositioning and avoidance of hip hyperflexion during labour. The expected recovery period ranges from 2 to 24 months. CONCLUSION: Femoral neuropathy after vaginal delivery is under-reported. Though prognosis is often excellent, special attention to positioning during labour, prompt clinical diagnosis, and interdisciplinary management are essential for this rare injury.

Extended pulsed radiofrequency as a part of multimodal pain management in a refractory case of Bernhardt-Roth syndrome.

Bernhardt-Roth syndrome (BRS) is a neurological condition characterised by pain, burning or numbness in anterolateral thigh due to entrapment of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN). The possible aetiologies can be mechanical, iatrogenic, neuropathic or idiopathic. After consent for possible publication, we are discussing a case of pain management in a 38-year-old patient with BRS secondary to diabetes. The coherent history, uncontrolled glycaemic status and reduced nerve conduction velocity for LFCN helped reach the diagnosis. Initial treatment with pharmacotherapy, steroid LFCN block and conventional pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) provided moderate temporary pain relief. Extended PRF over 8 min provided significant analgesia without any complications. Physical therapy, adequate glycaemic control and extended PRF provided complete pain relief and improved function over 6 months of follow-up duration. Hence, a cautious multifaceted approach targeting the basic aetiology with extended PRF helped achieve significant analgesia in our refractory case of BRS.

Conservative Treatment Versus Ultrasound-Guided Injection in the Management of Meralgia Paresthetica: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meralgia paresthetica (MP) is an entrapment mononeuropathy of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN), in which conservative treatment options are not always sufficient. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound (US)-guided LFCN injection in the management of MP by comparing with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) therapy and sham TENS therapy. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, sham-controlled study. SETTING: Health Sciences University Training and Research Hospital in Turkey. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with LFCN compression with clinical and electrophysiological findings were included in this study. Patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (1) US-guided injection group, (2) TENS group, and (3) sham TENS group. The blockage of the LFCN was performed for therapeutic MP management in group 1. Ten sessions of conventional TENS were administered to each patient 5 days per week for 2 weeks, for 20 minutes per daily session in group 2, and sham TENS was applied to group 3 with the same protocol. Visual Analog Scale (VAS), painDETECT questionnaire, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test (SWMt), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and health-related quality of life (36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]) at onset (T1), 15 days after treatment (T2), and 1 month after treatment (T3) were used for evaluation. Patients and the investigator who evaluated the results were blinded to the treatment protocol during the study period. RESULTS: A total of 54 of the 62 patients (group 1 n = 17, group 2 n = 16, group 3 n = 21) completed the study, 3 patients from group 1, 4 patients from group 2, and 1 patient from group 3 dropped out during the follow-up period. The mean changes in painDETECT and SWMt scores showed a statistically significant difference between groups in favor of group 1 at T2 and T3 compared with T1 (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in terms of VAS, SF-36, and PSQI scores (P > 0.05). In-group analysis of VAS scores showed a statistically significant decrease in T2 and T3 compared with T1 in group 1 (P < 0.05). In-group analysis of the VAS scores statistically significant decrease was shown in T2 compared with T1 in group 2 (P < 0.05). In-group analysis of painDETECT scores statistically significant decrease was shown in T2 and T3 compared with T1 in all groups (P < 0.05). In-group analysis of SWMt scores statistically significant decrease was shown in T2 and T3 compared with T1 in group 1 (P < 0.05). In-group analysis of SF-36 and PSQI scores, there was no statistically significant decrease in all groups (P > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: The limitation of the study was a short follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: US-guided LFCN injection and TENS may be therapeutic options for MP treatment, however, for patients with neuropathic pain symptoms, US-guided LFCN injection may be a safe and alternative method to conservative treatment. KEY WORDS: Meralgia paresthetica, ultrasound-guided injection, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.

[Meralgia paraesthetica].

This review summarises the treatment of meralgia paraesthetica. The condition is easy to recognise clinically, and in most cases the effect of conservative treatment is good. In case of persistent symptoms, further work-up is recommended including neurophysiological testing and ultrasound examination. If surgery is decided, we recommend nerve decompression primarily, since this procedure holds a success rate of 60-70%. In case of persistent symptoms, neurectomy should be performed. Ultrasound examination immediately before surgery can be helpful in localising the nerve and shortening procedural time.

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome and Meralgia Paresthetica in Pregnancy.

IMPORTANCE: Carpal tunnel syndrome and meralgia paresthetica are 2 common neuropathies complicating pregnancy. Each of these causes significant discomfort but can be diagnosed and treated safely during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: This article outlines the existing literature diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of carpal tunnel syndrome and meralgia paresthetica, specifically looking at the implications during pregnancy. The aim is to provide a reference for physicians diagnosing and treating neuropathies in pregnant patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Existing literature on neuropathies during pregnancy, clinical presentation, and treatment options for both carpal tunnel syndrome and meralgia paresthetica was reviewed through a MEDLINE and PubMed search. Referenced articles were reviewed and used as primary source materials as appropriate. RESULTS: Carpal tunnel syndrome affects individuals of all ages and sexes but is more prevalent in women, particularly during pregnancy. Meralgia paresthetica can occur in various circumstances but is most commonly associated with prolonged second stage in lithotomy position. Multiple clinical signs and neurologic tests are useful to establish the diagnosis of either neuropathy. Effective treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome includes wrist splints, steroid and lidocaine injections, and release surgery. Optimal treatment of meralgia paresthetica remains controversial but includes nerve block injections and active release techniques. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neuropathies are common in pregnancy and can result in significant impairment. Accurate diagnosis is possible during pregnancy and can usually be accomplished with bedside neurologic tests. Treatment options can be safely considered during pregnancy and can result in symptomatic improvement and reduction in chronic symptoms.

Meralgia paresthetica: finding an effective cure.

Meralgia Paresthetica (MP) is one of the most common mononeuropathies of the lower limb. MP usually resolves on its own, even without treatment. However, many physicians are not aware of this diagnosis and may confuse patients with another nerve disease such as radiculopathies. Although no motor symptoms are associated with this condition, the sensory dysfunctions are potentially debilitating to patients. The variable course of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve also complicates treatments. Thus, the author recommends the use of ultrasonography to help locate the nerve. Many treatments for MP are available, but they are supported only by moderate to low-quality evidence. Treatments range from conservative to interventions using nerve blocks and surgery. Without a clear superiority of any treatment, the author concludes that treatment should be done in a stepwise fashion, from the noninvasive to the more invasive treatment if symptoms persist.

The Correlation of Meralgia Paresthetica and Spinal Surgery in Prone Position.

AIM: To investigate the incidence, risk factors, and recovery of patients with meralgia paresthetica (MP) following posterior spine surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent posterior spine surgeries in prone position at the authors’ clinics were included in this study. Patients with preoperative MP were excluded. RESULTS: Among the 560 patients who underwent spine surgery in prone position, 117 (21%) had impaired sensation along the anterolateral aspect of the thigh. One hundred three of them were treated with conservative treatment, whereas 14 underwent surgery for MP. CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment is the first option for MP. Patients who do not recover with conservative treatment may undergo surgical treatment.

[Research progress on meralgia paresthetica after posterior spine surgery].

Meralgia paresthetica (MP) after posterior spine surgery is caused by mechanical compression injury of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve, which presents as numbness or paresthesia in the confined area of the anterolateral thigh. MP after posterior spine surgery is a common postoperative complication, and the incidence is 12.7%-25.5%. Because its clinical manifestations are mild and easy to be ignored, often leading to treatment delays. This article mainly reviews the incidence, risk factors, prevention and treatment of MP after posterior spine surgery.