Department of Neurosurgery, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Neurosurgery. 2009 Oct;65(4 Suppl):A174-80. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000335641.17914.4C.
Using the sequential inflation of 2 sphygmomanometers, Lewis et al. (Heart 16:1-32, 1931) concluded that compressive neuropathy was secondary to ischemia of the compressed nerve segment. Despite subsequent animal studies demonstrating that compressive lesions are more likely the result of mechanical nerve deformation, disagreement remains as to the etiology of rapidly reversible compressive neuropathy. Our hypothesis is that, during the classic sphygmomanometer experiments, the areas of nerve compression at the cuff margins overlapped, so that a region of transient nerve deformation persisted during the second cuff inflation. If true, the original results by Lewis et al. would be consistent with a mechanical pathogenesis.
In our study, 6 patients underwent sequential upper extremity dual-sphygmomanometer inflation with serial assessment by grip-dynamometer and 2-point discrimination. The order of cuff inflation, as well as the distance between cuffs, was varied. Mean grip force and 2-point discrimination values were statistically compared between conditions.
Patients with overlapping cuffs maintained their neurological deficits, whereas those with separated cuffs experienced an improvement in both grip force (P = 0.02) and 2-point discrimination (P < 0.001) when cuff inflation was switched.
Rapidly reversible compressive neuropathy seems to be secondary to mechanical nerve deformation at the margins of the compressive force rather than the result of ischemia of the compressed nerve segment. Overlap of the mechanically deformed nerve segments likely explains why neurological deficits persisted despite sequential cuff inflation in the classic experiments by Lewis et al.
刘易斯等人(Heart 16:1-32, 1931)使用两个血压计的顺序充气,得出压迫性神经病继发于受压神经节段缺血的结论。尽管随后的动物研究表明,压迫性损伤更可能是机械性神经变形的结果,但关于迅速可逆压迫性神经病的病因仍存在争议。我们的假设是,在经典血压计实验中,袖带边缘的神经受压区域重叠,因此在第二次袖带充气期间,神经的短暂变形区域持续存在。如果这是真的,那么刘易斯等人的原始结果将与机械发病机制一致。
在我们的研究中,6 名患者接受了上肢双重血压计的顺序充气,并用握力计和两点辨别力进行了连续评估。袖带充气的顺序以及袖带之间的距离都有所不同。统计比较了不同条件下的平均握力和两点辨别力值。
重叠袖带的患者保持其神经功能缺损,而分开袖带的患者在切换袖带充气时,握力(P=0.02)和两点辨别力(P<0.001)均有所改善。
迅速可逆压迫性神经病似乎继发于压迫力边缘的机械性神经变形,而不是受压神经节段缺血的结果。在刘易斯等人的经典实验中,机械变形的神经节段重叠可能解释了为什么尽管进行了顺序袖带充气,但神经功能缺损仍持续存在。