Zyluk Andrzej, Puchalski Piotr, Nawrot Przemysław
Klinika Chirurgii Ogólnej i Chirurgii Reki, Pomorski Uniwersytet Medyczny w Szczecinie.
Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol. 2010 Nov-Dec;75(6):385-91.
Ultrasonography has had relatively long history (approximately 20 years) in the diagnosing carpal tunnel syndrome, but as late as in last decade has gained greater popularity and has been applied in the clinic. Numerous studies revealed that the most accurate parameter indicating the compression of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel is the cross sectional area of the nerve at the inlet level. However, contrary to the nerve conduction studies, sonographic measurements are characterised by wide range of normal, physiological (a mean of 4.8 to 9.7 mm2), pathological, indicating compression of the nerve values (a mean of 10.7 to 16.8 mm2) and cut-off coefficients between normal state and pathology (a mean of 6.5 to 14 mm2). Sensitivity and specificity of the method, calculated for different cut-off values is estimated of 60-90%, hence, is around 10% lower than the same parameters of electrophysiological tests. Difficulties in standardisation of cross-sectional nerve area (considered a classical parameter) motivated investigators to searching other indicators of the nerve compression, e.g. "wrist-forearm" ratio, which is a quotient of the cross sectional area of the median nerve at the carpal tunnel inlet and 12-15 proximally at the forearm level. Some studies showed greater accuracy of this ratio, allowing to obtain the sensitivity and specificity of more than 95%. After review of the studies, authors critically conclude that actual state of art does not justify considering ultrasonography a valuable additional test in diagnosing carpal tunnel syndrome and for routine use this technique in typical cases. Ultrasonography may be useful in patients with doubtful clinical picture, as a screening test, as well as in suspicion of intra-tunnel pathology. However, in atypical clinical situation, nerve conduction studies provide significantly more information on the function of the median nerve, presence of more than one compression sites or other pathology.
超声检查在诊断腕管综合征方面已有相对较长的历史(约20年),但直到最近十年才更受欢迎并应用于临床。众多研究表明,表明腕管内正中神经受压的最准确参数是神经在入口水平的横截面积。然而,与神经传导研究不同,超声测量的特点是正常、生理(平均4.8至9.7平方毫米)、病理(表明神经受压的值,平均10.7至16.8平方毫米)以及正常状态与病理之间的临界系数(平均6.5至14平方毫米)范围广泛。针对不同临界值计算的该方法的敏感性和特异性估计为60 - 90%,因此,比电生理测试的相同参数低约10%。横截面积神经区域标准化的困难(被视为经典参数)促使研究人员寻找神经受压的其他指标,例如“腕 - 前臂”比值,它是腕管入口处正中神经横截面积与前臂近端12 - 15处横截面积的商。一些研究表明该比值具有更高的准确性,敏感性和特异性可超过95%。在对这些研究进行综述后,作者批判性地得出结论,目前的技术水平并不足以证明超声检查是诊断腕管综合征的一项有价值的附加检查,也不适合在典型病例中常规使用该技术。超声检查对于临床表现可疑的患者、作为筛查试验以及怀疑隧道内病变时可能有用。然而,在非典型临床情况下,神经传导研究能提供关于正中神经功能、是否存在多个受压部位或其他病变的更多信息。