Suppr超能文献

神经活检:外周神经病变诊断的指征及作用。1987年至1997年间安特卫普大学和列日大学博恩·邦格基金会的经验。

Nerve biopsy: indications and contribution to the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathy. The experience of the Born Bunge Foundation University of Antwerp and University of Liege between 1987 and 1997.

作者信息

Deprez M, Ceuterick-de Groote C, Schoenen J, Reznik M, Martin J J

机构信息

Department of Pathology, University of Liège.

出版信息

Acta Neurol Belg. 2000 Sep;100(3):162-6.

Abstract

We reviewed 355 nerve biopsies analysed at the Laboratories of Neuropathology of the Born-Bunge Foundation/University of Antwerp (BBF/UIA) and University of Liège (ULg) between 1987 and 1997. We examined the indications for nerve biopsy, the yield of the procedure, and the influence of clinical and neuropathological parameters. Contributory biopsies accounted for 35.5% and 47.3% respectively at ULg and BBF/UIA laboratories: of these, one third showed specific histological findings, the majority being informative only when combined with the relevant clinical data. The profile of indications for nerve biopsy was roughly comparable in both laboratories. The search for an inflammatory neuropathy prompted 35-40% of all biopsies with more than 50% of specimens being informative in this indication. The lowest yield (20%) was obtained among the nerve biopsies performed in the absence of any presumptive aetiology. These accounted for 22-33% of all cases. Inadequate surgical resection, delays in transport or processing errors precluded histological study of 4% (BBF/UIA) to 8% (ULg) of the specimens. We conclude that nerve biopsies should be performed by experienced surgeons and handled in specialised laboratories. Only a relatively small number of causes of neuropathy can be diagnosed on the basis of histology alone. More often, contributory biopsies will result from the combination of non-specific suggestive histological features with relevant clinical information. The diagnostic yield of nerve biopsy is function of careful patient selection and close collaboration between the clinician and the neuropathologist.

摘要

我们回顾了1987年至1997年间在安特卫普大学博恩 - 邦格基金会神经病理学实验室(BBF/UIA)和列日大学(ULg)分析的355例神经活检病例。我们研究了神经活检的指征、该操作的成功率以及临床和神经病理学参数的影响。在ULg和BBF/UIA实验室,有贡献的活检分别占35.5%和47.3%:其中,三分之一显示出特定的组织学发现,大多数仅在与相关临床数据结合时才具有参考价值。两个实验室神经活检的指征概况大致相似。对炎性神经病的检查促使所有活检中有35 - 40%进行,在此指征下超过50%的标本具有参考价值。在没有任何推测病因的情况下进行的神经活检中成功率最低(20%)。这些占所有病例的22 - 33%。手术切除不充分、运输延迟或处理错误导致4%(BBF/UIA)至8%(ULg)的标本无法进行组织学研究。我们得出结论,神经活检应由经验丰富的外科医生进行,并在专门实验室处理。仅基于组织学只能诊断出相对较少的神经病病因。更多时候,有贡献的活检将来自非特异性提示性组织学特征与相关临床信息的结合。神经活检的诊断成功率取决于仔细的患者选择以及临床医生和神经病理学家之间的密切合作。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验