Suppr超能文献

热测试设备“Q-Sense”评估小纤维功能的技术和临床性能:与“热感觉分析仪”TSA 在糖尿病患者和健康志愿者中的头对头比较。

Technical and clinical performance of the thermo-test device "Q-Sense" to assess small fibre function: A head-to-head comparison with the "Thermal Sensory Analyzer" TSA in diabetic patients and healthy volunteers.

机构信息

Department of Neurophysiology, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Center of Biomedicine and Medical Technology, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.

Center for Pain Medicine, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Pain. 2019 Nov;23(10):1863-1878. doi: 10.1002/ejp.1461. Epub 2019 Sep 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Thermo-test devices are rarely used outside specialized pain centres because of high acquisition costs. Recently, a new, portable device ("Q-Sense") was introduced, which is less expensive but has reduced cooling capacity (20°C). We assessed the reliability/validity of the "Q-Sense" by comparing it with the Thermal Sensory Analyzer (TSA).

METHODS

Using a phantom-skin model, the physical characteristics of both devices were compared. The clinical performance was assessed in a multicentre study by performing Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) in 121 healthy volunteers and 83 diabetic patients (Eudra-Med-No. CIV-12-05-006501).

RESULTS

Both device types showed ~40% slower temperature ramps for heating/cooling than nominal data. Cold/warm detection thresholds (CDT, WDT) and heat pain thresholds (HPT) of healthy subjects did not differ between device types. Cold pain thresholds (CPT) were biased for Q-Sense by a floor effect (p < .001). According to intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), agreement between TSA and Q-Sense was good/excellent for CDT (ICC = 0.894) and WDT (ICC = 0.898), moderate for HPT (ICC = 0.525) and poor for CPT (ICC = 0.305). In diabetic patients, the sensitivity of Q-Sense to detect cold hypoesthesia was reduced in males >60 years. Moderate correlations between thermal detection thresholds and morphological data from skin biopsies (n = 51) were similar for both devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical characteristics of both thermo-test devices are similarly limited by the poor temperature conduction of the skin. The Q-Sense is useful for thermal detection thresholds but of limited use for pain thresholds. For full clinical use, the lower cut-off temperature should be set to ≤18°C.

SIGNIFICANCE

High purchase costs prevent a widespread use of thermo-test devices for diagnosing small fibre neuropathy. The air-cooled "Q-Sense" could be a lower cost alternative, but its technical/clinical performance needs to be assessed because of its restricted cut-off for cooling (20°C). This study provides critical information on the physical characteristics and the clinical validity/reliability of the Q-Sense compared to the "Thermal Sensory Analyzer" (TSA). We recommend lowering the cut-off value of the Q-Sense to ≤18°C for its full clinical use.

摘要

背景

由于购置成本高,热感觉测试仪器很少在专门的疼痛中心以外使用。最近,一种新的、便携式设备(“Q-Sense”)问世,它的价格较低,但冷却能力降低(20°C)。我们通过将其与热感觉分析仪(TSA)进行比较,评估了“Q-Sense”的可靠性/有效性。

方法

使用皮肤模型比较两种设备的物理特性。通过在 121 名健康志愿者和 83 名糖尿病患者(Eudra-Med-No. CIV-12-05-006501)中进行定量感觉测试(QST),在一项多中心研究中评估其临床性能。

结果

两种设备类型的加热/冷却温度斜坡速度比标称数据慢约 40%。健康受试者的冷热检测阈值(CDT、WDT)和热痛阈值(HPT)在设备类型之间没有差异。Q-Sense 的冷痛阈值(CPT)因下限效应而存在偏差(p<0.001)。根据组内相关系数(ICC),TSA 和 Q-Sense 之间的一致性对于 CDT(ICC=0.894)和 WDT(ICC=0.898)为良好/优秀,对于 HPT(ICC=0.525)为中等,对于 CPT(ICC=0.305)为差。在糖尿病患者中,Q-Sense 检测男性>60 岁者冷感觉迟钝的敏感性降低。两种设备的皮肤活检形态数据与热觉检测阈值之间存在中度相关性。

结论

两种热感觉测试设备的物理特性都受到皮肤较差的温度传导的限制。Q-Sense 可用于热觉检测阈值,但对痛觉阈值的应用有限。为了充分的临床应用,应将下限温度设定为≤18°C。

意义

高购置成本阻碍了热感觉测试仪器在诊断小纤维神经病中的广泛应用。风冷的“Q-Sense”可能是一种成本较低的替代方案,但由于其冷却的截止温度限制(20°C),需要评估其技术/临床性能。本研究提供了与“热感觉分析仪”(TSA)相比,“Q-Sense”的物理特性和临床有效性/可靠性的关键信息。我们建议将 Q-Sense 的截止值降低到≤18°C,以充分发挥其临床应用。

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