Normative Ulnar Nerve Conduction Study: Comparison of Two Measurement Methods

Haghighat, Shila; Mahmoodian, Amir Ebrahim; Kianimehr, Lida

Normative Ulnar Nerve Conduction Study: Comparison of Two Measurement Methods

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Given the high prevalence rate of ulnar neuropathy and importance of its proper management, to have a baseline information about the normative value of motor nerve conduction of first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle and abductor digiti minimi muscle (ADM) and their differences as well as their relation with different demographic characteristics of our population, we aimed to determine and compare the mean value of motor conduction velocity of FDI and ADM at forearm and across the elbow among the normal population. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, healthy participants were enrolled in the study. Ulnar nerve motor nerve conduction velocity (MNCV) was recorded from the ADM and the FDI at forearm and across the elbow. Mean MNCV of the ulnar nerve recorded from ADM and FDI was compared. In addition, MNCV of the ulnar nerve measured at the forearm and across the elbow was compared also. Results: During this study, 165 healthy volunteers selected and participated in the study. Mean of ulnar nerve MNCV for ADM was significantly lower than FDI, both at forearm and across the elbow (P < 0.001). Mean of ulnar nerve MNCV was significantly lower at forearm comparing than elbow level for both ADM and FDI (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The findings of the current study provide us a baseline data regarding the normative mean value of ulnar nerve MNCV in different locations, which could be used for providing an appropriate diagnostic protocol for ulnar nerve neuropathy. However, further studies among patients suspected with ulnar nerve neuropathy are needed.

Keywords

References

1.	Beekman R, Van Der Plas JP, Uitdehaag BM, Schellens RL, Visser LH. Clinical, electrodiagnostic, and sonographic studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Muscle Nerve 2004;30:202-8. [PUBMED]
2.	Stewart JD. The variable clinical manifestations of ulnar neuropathies at the elbow. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987;50:252-8. [PUBMED]
3.	Dunselman HH, Visser LH. The clinical, electrophysiological and prognostic heterogeneity of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:1364-7.
4.	Landau ME, Campbell WW. Clinical features and electrodiagnosis of ulnar neuropathies. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2013;24:49-66.
5.	Kimura J. Peripheral nerve diseases, handbook of clinical neurophysiology. Iowa City: Elsevier. 2006.
6.	Assmus H, Antoniadis G, Bischoff C, Hoffmann R, Martini AK, Preissler P, et al. Cubital tunnel syndrome–a review and management guidelines. Central European neurosurgery. 2011;72(2):90-8.
7.	Kothari MJ, Heistand M, Rutkove SB. Three ulnar nerve conduction studies in patients with ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79:87-9.
8.	Tackmann W, Vogel P, Kaeser HE, Ettlin T. Sensitivity and localizing significance of motor and sensory electroneurographic parameters in the diagnosis of ulnar nerve lesions at the elbow. A reappraisal. J Neurol 1984;231:204-11.
9.	Kern RZ. The electrodiagnosis of ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow. Can J Neurol Sci 2003;30:314-9.
10.	Benatar M, Wuu J, Peng L. Reference data for commonly used sensory and motor nerve conduction studies. Muscle Nerve 2009;40:772-94.
11.	Lo YL, Dan YF, Lee MP, Ratnagopal P. Segmental mixed nerve conduction studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. J Clin Neurophysiol 2001;18:456-9.
12.	Shakir A, Micklesen PJ, Robinson LR. Which motor nerve conduction study is best in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow? Muscle Nerve 2004;29:585-90.
13.	Morini A. Invited commentary. Ulnar motor conduction studies with FDI CMAP recording for the electrodiagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at elbow. Neurol India 2007;55:104-5. [PUBMED] [Full text]
14.	Yoon JS, Walker FO, Cartwright MS. Ulnar neuropathy with normal electrodiagnosis and abnormal nerve ultrasound. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:318-20.
15.	Ehler E, Ridzon P, Urban P, Mazanec R, Nakládalová M, Procházka B, et al. Ulnar nerve at the elbow – Normative nerve conduction study. J Brachial Plex Peripher Nerve Inj 2013;8:2.
16.	Azma K, Bahmanteimoury K, Tavana B, Moghaddam FR, Moghaddam NM, Mahmoudi H. Two measurement methods of motor ulnar nerve conduction velocity at the elbow: A comparative study. Neurol India 2007;55:145-7. [PUBMED] [Full text]
17.	Caliandro P, Foschini M, Pazzaglia C, La Torre G, Aprile I, Granata G, et al. IN-RATIO: A new test to increase diagnostic sensitivity in ulnar nerve entrapment at elbow. Clin Neurophysiol 2008;119:1600-6.
18.	Visser LH, Beekman R, Franssen H. Short-segment nerve conduction studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Muscle Nerve 2005;31:331-8.
19.	Eliaspour D, Sedighipour L, Hedayati-Moghaddam MR, Rayegani SM, Bahrami MH, Roghani RS. The pattern of muscle involvement in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Neurol India 2012;60:36-9. [PUBMED] [Full text]
20.	Chan KM, Andres LP, Polykovskaya Y, Brown WF. The effects of training through high-frequency electrical stimulation on the physiological properties of single human thenar motor units. Muscle Nerve 1999;22:186-95.

Advanced Biomedical Research