High-resolution ultrasound may depict pseudomeningocele

Pseudomeningocele is a pathological condition deriving from cerebrospinal fluid leak throughout a fissure of the dura mater. The came out fluid is enclosed in a space delimited by the soft tissues. It can be congenital, iatrogenic or traumatic (mainly in brachial plexus injury) and can be often associated with root avulsion, a severe condition which should be aware as soon as possible. The incidence of traumatic pseudomeningocele of this type is 21–57 % . In brachial plexus injury, magnetic resonance (MR) is the gold standard to assess the damage, allowing the visualization of root avulsion and pseudomeningocele . Even high-frequency ultrasound (US) may be used as first line tool in brachial plexus injury, showing data that, in some cases, require a comprehensive assessment through MR [4]. No cases of pseudomeningocele, visualized by US, have so far been reported. We describe two patients with traumatic brachial plexus injury, in whom US showed findings indicating the presence of fluid, close to a cervical root, compatible with pseudomeningocele

Neuropathic Pain in the Emergency Setting: Diagnosis and Management

Neuropathic pain, traditionally considered a chronic condition, is increasingly encountered in the emergency department (ED), accounting for approximately 20% of patients presenting with pain. Understanding the physiology and key clinical presentations of neuropathic pain is crucial for ED physicians to provide optimal treatment. While diagnosing neuropathic pain can be challenging, emphasis should be placed on obtaining a comprehensive medical history and conducting a thorough clinical examination. Patients often describe neuropathic pain as a burning or shock-like sensation, leading them to seek care in the ED after ineffective relief from common analgesics such as paracetamol and NSAIDs. Collaboration between emergency medicine specialists, neurologists, and pain management experts can contribute to the development of evidence-based guidelines specifically tailored for the emergency department setting. This article provides a concise overview of the common clinical manifestations of neuropathic pain that may prompt patients to seek emergency care

Transfer to inpatient rehabilitation facilities after neurological admission

N/

Sensitivity and specificity of a commercial ELISA test for anti-MAG antibodies in patients with neuropathy

For the diagnosis of anti-MAG polyneuropathy the commercial ELISA manufacturer currently recommends a cut-off of 1000 Biihlmann Titer Units (BTU). We analyzed sera from 80 anti-MAG neuropathy patients and 383 controls (with other neuropathies or healthy controls) to assess the ELISA sensitivity and specificity at different thresholds. A better combination of sensitivity/specificity was found at a threshold > 1500 BTU than at > 1000 BTU. The best value of specificity was obtained at threshold > 7000 BTU. There was a diagnostic grey area between 1500 and 7000 BTU in which the clinical phenotypes as well as electrophysiological studies need to be carefully assessed particularly to differentiate CIDP and anti-MAG neuropathy

Frequency and clinical correlates of anti-nerve antibodies in a large population of CIDP patients included in the Italian database

Objective To investigate the frequency and clinical correlates of anti-nerve autoantibodies in an unselected series of Italian patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) Methods Sera from 276 CIDP patients fulfilling the EFNS/PNS criteria and included in the Italian CIDP database were examined for the presence of anti-nerve autoantibodies. Results were correlated with the clinical data collected in the database. Results Anti-neurofascin155 (NF155) antibodies were found in 9/258 (3.5%) patients, anti-contactin1 (CNTN1) antibodies in 4/258 (1.6%) patients, and anti-contactin-associated protein1 (Caspr1) in 1/197 (0.5%) patients, while none had reactivity to gliomedin or neurofascin 186. Predominance of IgG4 isotype was present in 7of the 9 examined patients. Anti-NF155 patients more frequently had ataxia, tremor, and higher CSF protein levels than antibody-negative patients. Anti-CNTN1 patients more frequently had a GBS-like onset, pain, and ataxia and had more severe motor impairment at enrollment than antibody-negative patients. They more frequently received plasmapheresis, possibly reflecting a less satisfactory response to IVIg or steroids. IgM antibodies against one or more gangliosides were found in 6.5% of the patients (17/260) and were more frequently directed against GM1 (3.9%). They were frequently associated with a progressive course, with a multifocal sensorimotor phenotype and less frequent cranial nerve involvement and ataxia. Conclusions Anti-paranodal and anti-ganglioside antibodies are infrequent in patients with CIDP but are associated with some typical clinical association supporting the hypothesis that CIDP might be a pathogenically heterogeneous syndrome possibly explaining the different clinical presentations

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of the 2021 EAN/PNS and 2010 EFNS/PNS diagnostic criteria for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

Objectives To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) diagnostic criteria for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) with those of the 2010 European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS). Methods Sensitivity and specificity of the two sets of criteria were evaluated in 330 patients with CIDP and 166 axonal peripheral neuropathy controls. Comparison of the utility of nerve conduction studies with different number of nerves examined and of the sensitivity and specificity of the two criteria in typical CIDP and its variants were assessed. Results EFNS/PNS criteria had a sensitivity of 92% for possible CIDP and 85% for probable/definite CIDP, while the EAN/PNS criteria had a sensitivity of 83% for possible CIDP and 74% for CIDP. Using supportive criteria, the sensitivity of the EAN/PNS criteria for possible CIDP increased to 85% and that of CIDP to 77%, remaining lower than that of the EFNS/PNS criteria. Specificity of the EFNS/PNS criteria was 68% for possible CIDP and 84% for probable/definite CIDP, while the EAN/PNS criteria had a specificity of 88% for possible CIDP and 98% for CIDP. More extended studies increased the sensitivity of both sets of criteria by 4%-7% but reduced their specificity by 2%-3%. The EFNS/PNS criteria were more sensitive for the diagnosis of typical CIDP while the EAN/PNS criteria were more specific for the diagnosis of distal and sensory CIDP. Conclusions In our population, the EAN/PNS criteria were more specific but less sensitive than the EFNS/PNS criteria. With the EAN/PNS criteria, more extended nerve conduction studies are recommended to obtain an acceptable sensitivity while maintaining a high specificity