Suppr超能文献

密歇根糖尿病周围神经病变筛查工具的验证

Validation of Michigan neuropathy screening instrument for diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

作者信息

Moghtaderi Ali, Bakhshipour Alireza, Rashidi Homayra

机构信息

Neurology Department, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran.

出版信息

Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2006 Jul;108(5):477-81. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2005.08.003. Epub 2005 Sep 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The reliability and accuracy of the Michigan neuropathy screening instrument (MNSI) have been discussed recently. As a result of the difficulties of performing and analyzing nerve biopsy as a standard diagnostic test, electromyography and neuronography is used as the best alternative diagnostic procedure. The objective of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of the test characteristics and cut-off point of MNSI scoring for the diagnosis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

METHOD

Over a 2-year period, a cross-sectional study was conducted on 176 type 2 diabetic patients. An internist carried out the MNSI and the sum of scores varying from 0 to 1 for each abnormality as revealed in foot appearance, ulceration, ankle reflexes and vibratory perception has been recorded. A neurologist, who was blind to the MNSI scores, performed all neurophysiological studies. The test performance characteristics of the MNSI procedure were measured for different cut-off values.

RESULTS

MNSI scores of 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 were assessed as cut-off values. Sensitivities were 79%, 65%, 50% and 35% and specificities were 65%, 83%, 91% and 94%, respectively. Positive predictive values increased and negative predictive values decreased for each score. Accuracies, likelihood ratios and post-test probabilities were measured.

CONCLUSION

The accuracy of MNSI scoring makes it a useful screening test for diabetic neuropathy in taking a decision regarding which patients should be referred to a neurologist for electrophysiological studies. High specificity, likelihood ratios over 5 and a moderate to good post-test probability give a high diagnostic impact for MNSI scoring. We suggest a cut-off point of 2 for the MNSI procedure. However, electrophysiological studies should be considered when the patient has signs and symptoms other than those rated by the MNSI, suggesting peripheral nerve involvement, and also because the MNSI is still just a screening test.

摘要

目的

近期已对密歇根神经病变筛查工具(MNSI)的可靠性和准确性进行了讨论。由于将神经活检作为标准诊断测试存在操作和分析上的困难,肌电图和神经造影被用作最佳的替代诊断程序。本研究的目的是确定MNSI评分的测试特征和截断点对糖尿病性周围神经病变诊断的诊断性能。

方法

在两年时间里,对176名2型糖尿病患者进行了一项横断面研究。一名内科医生进行MNSI检查,并记录足部外观、溃疡、踝反射和振动觉中每项异常的得分,范围从0到1。一名对MNSI评分不知情的神经科医生进行了所有神经生理学研究。针对不同的截断值测量了MNSI程序的测试性能特征。

结果

将MNSI评分1.5、2.0、2.5和3.0作为截断值进行评估。敏感性分别为79%、65%、50%和35%,特异性分别为65%、83%、91%和94%。每个评分的阳性预测值增加而阴性预测值降低。测量了准确性、似然比和验后概率。

结论

MNSI评分的准确性使其成为糖尿病神经病变的一种有用筛查测试,有助于决定哪些患者应转诊给神经科医生进行电生理研究。高特异性、似然比超过5以及中度至良好的验后概率赋予MNSI评分较高的诊断影响力。我们建议MNSI程序的截断点为2。然而,当患者除了MNSI所评估的体征和症状外还有提示周围神经受累的其他体征和症状时,以及因为MNSI仍然只是一种筛查测试,所以仍应考虑进行电生理研究。

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