Trending Topic

4 mins

Trending Topic

Developed by Touch
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked

Welcome to this issue of touchREVIEWS in Neurology, where we explore significant advances in neurology, cognitive health, and wearable technology in the management of various chronic conditions. This issue brings together a collection of expert perspectives and research that spans innovative therapies, preventive strategies, and case studies, each offering critical insights for clinicians and researchers. […]

Practical Electrophysiology for the Diagnosis of Multifocal Motor Neuropathy

Hessel Franssen, Leonard H van den Berg
Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Download as PDF
Published Online: May 15th 2012 European Neurological Review, 2012;7(2):118-123 DOI: http://doi.org/10.17925/ENR.2012.07.02.118
Select a Section…
1

Abstract

Overview

Nerve conduction studies (NCS) are necessary to distinguish multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) from other disorders with a similar clinical picture. In MMN, NCS may show a unique combination of conduction block (CB) or conduction slowing consistent with demyelination, whereas sensory conduction in the same nerve is normal. This contribution discusses a relatively simple and practical electrophysiological approach for the diagnosis of MMN that can be used by any neurologist who has had training in NCS. When diagnosing MMN, the most important practical points are: careful stimulation technique, investigation according to a standardised protocol that includes at least five nerves per arm with stimulation up to Erb’s point, understanding of and adherence to criteria for conduction block and demyelinative slowing and exclusion of nerves with marked axon loss.

Keywords

Multifocal motor neuropathy, electrophysiology, nerve conduction studies, diagnosis, neuropathy

2

Article

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) presents clinically as a disorder of lower motor neurones with asymmetrical distribution and predominance in distal upper limbs. Electrophysiological investigation is considerably more sensitive and specific for MMN than magnetic resonance imaging of the brachial plexus.1,2 Nerve conduction studies (NCS) are therefore necessary to distinguish MMN from other disorders with a similar clinical picture, such as progressive spinal muscular atrophy, Hirayama disease, plexopathy and radiculopathy. NCS may show a combination of findings unique to MMN, comprising motor conduction block (CB), slowing of motor conduction consistent with demyelination and, in the nerves with motor abnormalities, normal sensory conduction. There may also be evidence of motor axon loss, such as decreased distally evoked compound muscle action potentials (CMAP) and marked signs of denervation and re-innervation on needle electromyography.3 It has not been resolved whether motor CB and slowing represent paranodal demyelination, segmental demyelination, or ion channel dysfunction at the node of Ranvier.

As discussed below, there is some debate concerning precise electrophysiological diagnostic criteria for MMN, but it is nevertheless possible to outline relatively simple electrophysiological techniques that can be used to diagnose MMN by neurologists who have been trained in NCS. Advanced techniques, such as the single fibre electromyography test for detection of conduction block in single axons, inching and the triple-collision technique, fall outside the scope of this paper.

Stimulation
NCS performed in the diagnosis of MMN are usually extensive and may require strong stimuli. It is therefore essential to use a carefultechnique to stimulate each site of a nerve. This reduces patient discomfort and technical errors arising from unwanted co-stimulation.

To view the full article in PDF or eBook formats, please click on the icons above.

2

References

  1. Van den Berg-Vos RM, Franssen H, Wokke JH, et al.,
    Multifocal motor neuropathy: diagnostic criteria that predict
    the response to immunoglobulin treatment, Ann Neurol,
    2000;48:919–26.

  2. Van Asseldonk JT, Van den Berg LH, Van den Berg-Vos RM,
    et al., Demyelination and axonal loss in multifocal motor
    neuropathy: distribution and relation to weakness, Brain,
    2003;126:186–98.

  3. Van Asseldonk JT, Van den Berg, Kalmijn S, et al., Axon
    loss is an important determinant of weakness in MMN,
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 2006;77:743–7.

  4. Vucic S, Black K, Chong PS, Cros D, Multifocal motor
    neuropathy with conduction block: distribution of
    demyelination and axonal degeneration, Clin Neurophysiol,
    2006;118:124–30.

  5. Van Asseldonk JT, Van den Berg LH, Wieneke GH, et al.,
    Criteria for conduction block based on computer simulation
    studies of nerve conduction with human data obtained in
    the forearm segment of the median nerve, Brain,
    2006;129:447–60.

  6. Feasby TE, Brown WF, Gilbert JJ, Hahn AF, The pathological
    basis of conduction block in human neuropathies,
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry,1985:48:239–44.

  7. Gosh A, Busby M, Kennett R, et al., A practical definition of
    conduction block in IVIg responsive multifocal motor
    neuropathy, J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 2005;76:1264–8.

  8. Oh SJ, Kim DE, Kuruoglu HR, What is the best index for
    conduction block and temporal dispersion?, Muscle Nerve,
    1994;17:489–93.

  9. Rhee EK, England JD, Sumner AJ, A computer simulation of
    conduction block: effects of phase cancellation produced
    by actual block versus interphase cancellation,
    Ann Neurol, 1990;28:146–56.

  10. Joint Task Force of the EFNS and PNS, European Federation
    of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society Guideline
    on management of multifocal motor neuropathy.
    Report of a Joint Task Force of the European Federation
    of Neurological Societies and the Peripheral Nerve
    Society—first revision, J Periph Nerve Syst, 2010;15:295–301.

  11. Cappellari A, Nobile-Orazio E, Meucci N, et al., Criteria for
    early detection of conduction block in MMN: a study based
    on control populations and follow-up of MMN patients,
    J Neurol, 1997;244:625–30.

  12. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, Olney
    RK, Consensus criteria for the diagnosis of partial
    conduction block, Muscle Nerve, 1999;8(Suppl. 1):S225–S9.

  13. Buchthal F, Behse F, Peroneal muscular atrophy (PMA) and
    related disorders, I. Clinical manifestations as related to
    biopsy findings, nerve conduction and electromyography,
    Brain, 1977;100:41–66.

  14. Franssen H, Wieneke GH, Nerve conduction and
    temperature: necessary warming time,
    Muscle Nerve, 1994;17:336–44.

  15. Van Asseldonk JT, Van den Berg LH, Kalmijn S, et al., Criteria
    for demyelination based on the maximum slowing due to
    axonal degeneration, determined after warming in water
    at 37°C: diagnostic yield in chronic inflammatory
    demyelinating polyneuropathy, Brain, 2005;128:880–91.

  16. Van den Berg LH, Franssen H, Van Doorn PA, Wokke JH,
    Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment in lower motor
    neuron disease associated with highly raised anti-GM1
    antibodies, J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 1997;63:674–7.

  17. Katz JS, Barohn RJ, Kojan S, et al., Axonal multifocal motor
    neuropathy without conduction block or other features
    of demyelination, Neurology, 2002;58:615–20.

  18. Geerlings AH, Mechelse K, Temperature and nerve
    conduction velocity, some practical problems,
    Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1985;25:253–9.

  19. Franssen H, Wieneke GH, Wokke JH, The influence of
    temperature on conduction block, Muscle Nerve,
    1999;22:166–73.

  20. Franssen H, Notermans, Wieneke GH, The influence of
    temperature on nerve conduction in patients with chronic
    axonal polyneuropathy, Clin Neurophysiol, 1999;110:933–40.

  21. Notermans NC, Franssen H, Wieneke GH, Wokke JH,
    Temperature dependence of nerve conduction and EMG in
    neuropathy associated with gammopathy, Muscle Nerve,
    1994;17:516–22.

  22. Rasminsky M, The effects of temperature on conduction
    in demyelinated single nerve fibers, Arch Neurol,
    1973;28:287–92.

3

Article Information

Disclosure

Hessel Franssen and Leonard H van den Berg have received travel grants from Baxter.

Correspondence

Hessel Franssen, Section of Neuromuscular Disorders, Department of Neurology, Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neuroscience, F02.230, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands. E: H.Franssen@umcutrecht.nl

Support

The publication of this article was funded by Baxter Innovations GmbH. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Baxter Innovations GmbH.

Received

2012-03-05T00:00:00

4

Further Resources

Share
Facebook
X (formerly Twitter)
LinkedIn
Via Email
Mark CompleteCompleted
BookmarkBookmarked
Copy LinkLink Copied
Download as PDF
Close Popup