ABSTRACT
Objectives:
To determine the false positive rate of sural nerve conduction studies for healthy subjects.
Materials and Methods:
We performed sural nerve conduction studies for 23 healthy subjects using both nerve-nerve technique and surface recording.
Results:
We found three abnormal results in the sural nerve-nerve technique. However, all those patients had normal results in the surface recording.
Conclusion:
The surface recording is recommended for suspicious cases in order to approve the abnormal results in the near-nerve technique.
Keywords: Polyneuropathy, Sural Nerve, Near-nerve Technique, Surface Electrode Recording, Nerve Conduction Study
References
1
Donofrio PD, Albers JW. AAEM minimonograph #34: polyneuropathy: classification by nerve conduction studies and electromyography. Muscle Nerve. 1990;13:889-903.
2
Falck B, Stålberg E, Bischoff C. Sensory nerve conduction studies with surface electrodes. Methods Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;5:1-20.
3
Behse F, Buchthal F. Normal sensory conduction in the nerves of the leg in man. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1971;34:404-414.
4
Buchthal F, Rosenfalck A. Sensory potentials in polyneuropathy. Brain. 1971;94:241-262.
5
Horowitz SH, Krarup C. Conduction studies of the normal sural nerve. Muscle Nerve. 1992;15:374-383.
6
Kural MA, Pugdahl K, Fuglsang-Frederiksen A, et al. Near-Nerve Needle Technique Versus Surface Electrode Recordings in Electrodiagnosis of Diabetic Polyneuropathy. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;33:346-349.
7
Kural MA, Karlsson P, Pugdahl K, et al. Diagnostic utility of distal nerve conduction studies and sural near-nerve needle recording in polyneuropathy. Clin Neurophysiol. 2017;128:1590-1595.
8
Rosenfalck P, Rosenfalck A. Electromyography-sensory and motor conduction. Findings in normal subjects. Laboratory of Clinical Neurophysiology. Copenhagen (1975).
9
Tankisi H, Pugdahl K, Otto M, et al. Misinterpretation of sural nerve conduction studies due to anatomical variation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125:2115-2121.
