Skin biopsy for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy: A critically appraised topic

Ales Hlubocky, Kay Wellik, Mark A Ross, Benn E. Smith, Charlene Hoffman-Snyder, Bart M Demaerschalk, Dean Marko Wingerchuk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Patients with lower extremity sensory symptoms and pain but without clinical or standard neurophysiological examination abnormalities may have a small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy with intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) assessment has been promoted as a diagnostic tool for such patients. Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of skin biopsy with IENFD in patients with suspected small fiber neuropathy. METHODS:: The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario, structured question, search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and content experts in the field of neuromuscular neurology. Results: One primary article was selected for review. A retrospective study using skin biopsy with IENFD detected abnormalities in 88.1% of 67 patients who had symptoms suggestive of sensory neuropathy but normal nerve conduction studies compared with 10% of healthy controls. Skin biopsy was more often abnormal in this setting than either the clinical examination (signs of small fiber impairment) or quantitative sensory testing but formal evaluation of sensitivity and specificity are compromised by inclusion of the diagnostic tests within the definition of the reference standard. Skin biopsy with IENFD was abnormal in 81% of patients clinically diagnosed with mixed large and small fiber neuropathy, 0/22 patients with large fiber neuropathy and 0/16 patients with nonperipheral neuropathic disorders. Conclusion: Detection of reduced IENFD using skin biopsy may be sensitive and specific for clinically-defined syndromes consistent with small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy appears to have greater diagnostic utility than the neurologic examination and quantitative sensory testing, both of which rely heavily on subjective patient perception. Prospective studies that evaluate quantitative methodology (rather than modalities that rely on patient report) and do not include the diagnostic tests in the reference standard are needed. Consensus is needed regarding a reference standard definition for small fiber neuropathy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)61-63
Number of pages3
JournalNeurologist
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2010

Fingerprint

Biopsy
Skin
Nerve Fibers
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Librarians
Small Fiber Neuropathy
Neural Conduction
Neurologic Examination
Neurology
Consultants
Lower Extremity
Consensus
Retrospective Studies
Prospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity
Pain

Keywords

  • Critically appraised topic
  • Diagnosis
  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Intraepidermal nerve fiber density
  • Quantitative sensory testing
  • Sensitivity
  • Skin biopsy
  • Small fiber neuropathy
  • Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Skin biopsy for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy : A critically appraised topic. / Hlubocky, Ales; Wellik, Kay; Ross, Mark A; Smith, Benn E.; Hoffman-Snyder, Charlene; Demaerschalk, Bart M; Wingerchuk, Dean Marko.

In: Neurologist, Vol. 16, No. 1, 01.2010, p. 61-63.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hlubocky, Ales ; Wellik, Kay ; Ross, Mark A ; Smith, Benn E. ; Hoffman-Snyder, Charlene ; Demaerschalk, Bart M ; Wingerchuk, Dean Marko. / Skin biopsy for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy : A critically appraised topic. In: Neurologist. 2010 ; Vol. 16, No. 1. pp. 61-63.
@article{3ee11a1ba7634c918f96cf0a68934bec,
title = "Skin biopsy for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy: A critically appraised topic",
abstract = "Background: Patients with lower extremity sensory symptoms and pain but without clinical or standard neurophysiological examination abnormalities may have a small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy with intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) assessment has been promoted as a diagnostic tool for such patients. Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of skin biopsy with IENFD in patients with suspected small fiber neuropathy. METHODS:: The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario, structured question, search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and content experts in the field of neuromuscular neurology. Results: One primary article was selected for review. A retrospective study using skin biopsy with IENFD detected abnormalities in 88.1{\%} of 67 patients who had symptoms suggestive of sensory neuropathy but normal nerve conduction studies compared with 10{\%} of healthy controls. Skin biopsy was more often abnormal in this setting than either the clinical examination (signs of small fiber impairment) or quantitative sensory testing but formal evaluation of sensitivity and specificity are compromised by inclusion of the diagnostic tests within the definition of the reference standard. Skin biopsy with IENFD was abnormal in 81{\%} of patients clinically diagnosed with mixed large and small fiber neuropathy, 0/22 patients with large fiber neuropathy and 0/16 patients with nonperipheral neuropathic disorders. Conclusion: Detection of reduced IENFD using skin biopsy may be sensitive and specific for clinically-defined syndromes consistent with small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy appears to have greater diagnostic utility than the neurologic examination and quantitative sensory testing, both of which rely heavily on subjective patient perception. Prospective studies that evaluate quantitative methodology (rather than modalities that rely on patient report) and do not include the diagnostic tests in the reference standard are needed. Consensus is needed regarding a reference standard definition for small fiber neuropathy.",
keywords = "Critically appraised topic, Diagnosis, Evidence-based medicine, Intraepidermal nerve fiber density, Quantitative sensory testing, Sensitivity, Skin biopsy, Small fiber neuropathy, Specificity",
author = "Ales Hlubocky and Kay Wellik and Ross, {Mark A} and Smith, {Benn E.} and Charlene Hoffman-Snyder and Demaerschalk, {Bart M} and Wingerchuk, {Dean Marko}",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/NRL.0b013e3181c9c303",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "61--63",
journal = "Neurologist",
issn = "1074-7931",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Skin biopsy for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy

T2 - A critically appraised topic

AU - Hlubocky, Ales

AU - Wellik, Kay

AU - Ross, Mark A

AU - Smith, Benn E.

AU - Hoffman-Snyder, Charlene

AU - Demaerschalk, Bart M

AU - Wingerchuk, Dean Marko

PY - 2010/1

Y1 - 2010/1

N2 - Background: Patients with lower extremity sensory symptoms and pain but without clinical or standard neurophysiological examination abnormalities may have a small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy with intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) assessment has been promoted as a diagnostic tool for such patients. Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of skin biopsy with IENFD in patients with suspected small fiber neuropathy. METHODS:: The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario, structured question, search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and content experts in the field of neuromuscular neurology. Results: One primary article was selected for review. A retrospective study using skin biopsy with IENFD detected abnormalities in 88.1% of 67 patients who had symptoms suggestive of sensory neuropathy but normal nerve conduction studies compared with 10% of healthy controls. Skin biopsy was more often abnormal in this setting than either the clinical examination (signs of small fiber impairment) or quantitative sensory testing but formal evaluation of sensitivity and specificity are compromised by inclusion of the diagnostic tests within the definition of the reference standard. Skin biopsy with IENFD was abnormal in 81% of patients clinically diagnosed with mixed large and small fiber neuropathy, 0/22 patients with large fiber neuropathy and 0/16 patients with nonperipheral neuropathic disorders. Conclusion: Detection of reduced IENFD using skin biopsy may be sensitive and specific for clinically-defined syndromes consistent with small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy appears to have greater diagnostic utility than the neurologic examination and quantitative sensory testing, both of which rely heavily on subjective patient perception. Prospective studies that evaluate quantitative methodology (rather than modalities that rely on patient report) and do not include the diagnostic tests in the reference standard are needed. Consensus is needed regarding a reference standard definition for small fiber neuropathy.

AB - Background: Patients with lower extremity sensory symptoms and pain but without clinical or standard neurophysiological examination abnormalities may have a small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy with intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) assessment has been promoted as a diagnostic tool for such patients. Objectives: To evaluate the diagnostic utility of skin biopsy with IENFD in patients with suspected small fiber neuropathy. METHODS:: The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario, structured question, search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and content experts in the field of neuromuscular neurology. Results: One primary article was selected for review. A retrospective study using skin biopsy with IENFD detected abnormalities in 88.1% of 67 patients who had symptoms suggestive of sensory neuropathy but normal nerve conduction studies compared with 10% of healthy controls. Skin biopsy was more often abnormal in this setting than either the clinical examination (signs of small fiber impairment) or quantitative sensory testing but formal evaluation of sensitivity and specificity are compromised by inclusion of the diagnostic tests within the definition of the reference standard. Skin biopsy with IENFD was abnormal in 81% of patients clinically diagnosed with mixed large and small fiber neuropathy, 0/22 patients with large fiber neuropathy and 0/16 patients with nonperipheral neuropathic disorders. Conclusion: Detection of reduced IENFD using skin biopsy may be sensitive and specific for clinically-defined syndromes consistent with small fiber neuropathy. Skin biopsy appears to have greater diagnostic utility than the neurologic examination and quantitative sensory testing, both of which rely heavily on subjective patient perception. Prospective studies that evaluate quantitative methodology (rather than modalities that rely on patient report) and do not include the diagnostic tests in the reference standard are needed. Consensus is needed regarding a reference standard definition for small fiber neuropathy.

KW - Critically appraised topic

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Intraepidermal nerve fiber density

KW - Quantitative sensory testing

KW - Sensitivity

KW - Skin biopsy

KW - Small fiber neuropathy

KW - Specificity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75749151771&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=75749151771&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/NRL.0b013e3181c9c303

DO - 10.1097/NRL.0b013e3181c9c303

M3 - Article

C2 - 20065802

AN - SCOPUS:75749151771

VL - 16

SP - 61

EP - 63

JO - Neurologist

JF - Neurologist

SN - 1074-7931

IS - 1

ER -