Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Cerebral palsy (1)
- Children (1)
- Neuropathic pain (1)
- Quantitative sensory testing (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (2)
Introduction:
Many patients with cerebral palsy (CP) suffer chronic pain as one of the most limiting factors in their quality of life. In CP patients, pain mechanisms are not well understood, and pain therapy remains a challenge. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) might provide unique information about the functional status of the somatosensory system and therefore better guide pain treatment.
Objectives:
To understand better the underlying pain mechanisms in pediatric CP patients, we aimed to assess clinical and pain parameters, as well as QST profiles, which were matched to the patients' cerebral imaging pathology.
Patients and methods:
Thirty CP patients aged 6–20 years old (mean age 12 years) without intellectual impairment underwent standardized assessments of QST. Cerebral imaging was reassessed. QST results were compared to age- and sex-matched controls (multiple linear regression; Fisher's exact test; linear correlation analysis).
Results:
CP patients were less sensitive to all mechanical and thermal stimuli than healthy controls but more sensitive to all mechanical pain stimuli (each p < 0.001). Fifty percent of CP patients showed a combination of mechanical hypoesthesia, thermal hypoesthesia and mechanical hyperalgesia; 67% of CP patients had periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), which was correlated with mechanic (r = 0.661; p < 0.001) and thermal (r = 0.624; p = 0.001) hypoesthesia.
Conclusion:
The combination of mechanical hypoesthesia, thermal hypoesthesia and mechanical hyperalgesia in our CP patients implicates lemniscal and extralemniscal neuron dysfunction in the thalamus region, likely due to PVL. We suspect that extralemniscal tracts are involved in the original of pain in our CP patients, as in adults.
Aims:
To assess the diagnostic utility of a novel abbreviated monofilament test in comparison with the tuning fork test to detect diabetic peripheral neuropathy in children.
Methods:
A total of 88 children with Type 1 diabetes mellitus were screened for diabetic peripheral neuropathy using the monofilament test and the tuning fork. Nerve conduction studies were performed according to the ‘gold standard’ for neuropathy. We assessed the diagnostic utility and inter-rater agreement of the two screening methods.
Results:
A total of 43 (49%) children (aged 6–18 years) had at least one abnormal nerve conduction study result. Diagnostic utility and inter-rater agreement were very low for both screening methods. The monofilament test yielded a sensitivity of 18% and a specificity of 80%. The tuning fork yielded a sensitivity of 0% and a specificity of 98%.
Conclusion:
The present study found that an abbreviated monofilament test has low diagnostic utility for the detection of early diabetic peripheral neuropathy because of its low reliability. The problem of reliability needs to be more thoroughly addressed in order to improve the screening procedures in diabetes management in childhood and adolescence.