Role of Pain-Related Evoked Potential in the Diagnosis of Meralgia Paresthetica

Diagnostic Approach to Lower Limb Entrapment Neuropathies: A Narrative Literature Review

Entrapment neuropathies of the lower limb are a misunderstood and underdiagnosed group of disorders, characterized by pain and dysesthesia, muscular weakness, and specific provoking movements on physical examination. The most frequent of these syndromes encountered in clinical practice are fibular nerve entrapment, proximal tibial neuropathy, sural nerve neuropathy, deep gluteal syndrome or sciatic nerve entrapment, and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve entrapment, also known as meralgia paresthetica. These are commonly mistaken for lumbar plexopathies, radiculopathies, and musculotendinous diseases, which appear even more frequently and have overlapping clinical presentations. A comprehensive anamnesis, physical examination, and electrodiagnostic studies should help clarify the diagnosis. If the diagnosis is still unclear or a secondary cause of entrapment is suspected, magnetic resonance neurography, MRI, or ultrasonography should be conducted to clarify the etiology, rule out other diseases, and confirm the diagnosis. The aim of this narrative review was to help clinicians gain familiarity with this disease, with an increase in diagnostic confidence, leading to early diagnosis of nerve damage and prevention of muscle atrophy. We reviewed the epidemiology, anatomy, pathophysiology, etiology, clinical presentation, and EDX technique and interpretation of the entrapment neuropathies of the lower limb, using articles published from 1970 to 2022 included in the Pubmed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases.

Pain-Related Vertex Evoked Potentials. Comparison of Surface Electrical to Heat Stimulation

INTRODUCTION

Demonstration of nociceptive fiber abnormality is important for diagnosing neuropathic pain and small fiber neuropathies. This is usually assessed by brief heat pulses using lasers, contact heat, or special electrodes. We hypothesized that pain-related evoked potentials to conventional surface electrical stimulation (PREPse) can index Aδ afferences despite tactile Aß fibers coactivation. PREPse may be more readily used clinically than contact heat evoked potentials (CHEPS).

METHODS

Twenty-eight healthy subjects. Vertex (Cz-A1/A2) recordings. Electrical stimulation of middle finger and second toe with conventional ring, and forearm/leg skin with cup, electrodes. Contact heat stimulation to forearm and leg. Compression ischemic nerve blockade.

RESULTS

PREPse peripheral velocities were within the midrange of Aδ fibers. N1-P1 amplitude increased with pain numerical rating scale graded (0-10) electrical stimulation (n = 25) and decreased with increasing stimulation frequency. Amplitudes were unchanged by different presentation orders of four stimulation intensities. PREPse N1 (∼130 milliseconds) and N2 (∼345 milliseconds) peaks were approximately 40 milliseconds earlier than that with CHEPS. PREPse and CHEPS N1-N2 interpeak latency (∼207 milliseconds) were similar. PREPse became unrecordable with nerve blockade of Aδ fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

PREPse earlier N1 and N2 peaks, and similar interpeak N1-N2 latencies and central conduction velocities, or synaptic delays, to CHEPS are consistent with direct stimulation of Aδ fibers. The relation of vertex PREPse amplitude and pain, or the differential effects of frequency stimulation, is similar to pain-related evoked potential to laser, special electrodes, or contact heat stimulation. The relationship to Aδ was validated by conduction velocity and nerve block. Clinical utility of PREPse compared with CHEPS needs validation in somatosensory pathways lesions.

Pain-related evoked potentials with concentric surface electrodes in patients and healthy subjects: a systematic review

Pain-related evoked potentials with concentric surface electrodes (PREP with CE) have been increasingly used in the diagnostics of polyneuropathies as well as in pain research. However, the study results are partly inconsistent regarding their utility to distinguish between normal and abnormal findings. The present systematic review aimed to summarise and compare study results, where PREP with CE were used in healthy subjects or patients and to identify possible influencing factors. We found 36 research articles, of which 21 investigated disorders in patients compared to healthy controls, while the other 15 focussed on basic research in healthy subjects. Patients with polyneuropathies showed the most consistent PREP results with similar prolonged latencies and reduced amplitude values. Findings in other patient groups or in healthy subjects were more heterogeneous. There was evidence for an influence by age and height as well as by central effects like emotions, which should be considered in further studies. Further systematic research analysing PREP results depending on individual and disease-specific factors is needed to develop optimal normative values.