Difference in normal limit values of nerve conduction parameters between Westerners and Japanese people might need to be considered when diagnosing diabetic polyneuropathy using a Point‐of‐Care Sural Nerve Conduction Device (NC‐stat®/DPNCheck™). Issue 5 (6th March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hirayasu, Kazuhiro; Sasaki, Hideyuki; Kishimoto, Shohei; Kurisu, Seigo; Noda, Koji; Ogawa, Kenichi; Tanaka, Hiroto; Sakakibara, Yumiko; Matsuno, Shohei; Furuta, Hiroto; Arita, Mikio; Naka, Keigo; Nanjo, Kishio
• Is Part Of: Journal of diabetes investigation. Volume 9:Issue 5(2018)
• Page Start: 1173
• Page End: 1181
• Publication Date: 2018-03-06
• Subjects: Clinical -- Complication I – nerve -- Diagnosis and pathophysiology; Diabetes -- Periodicals; Diabetes -- Research -- Periodicals; Diabetes Mellitus -- Periodicals; 616.462005
• DOI: 10.1111/jdi.12818
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2040-1116

Abstract

Abstract: Aim/Introduction: Studies on a novel point‐of‐care device for nerve conduction study called DPNCheck have been limited to Westerners. We aimed to clarify Japanese normal limits of nerve action potential amplitude (Amp) and conduction velocity by DPNCheck (investigation I), and the validity of DPNCheck to identify diabetic symmetric sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN; investigation II). Materials and Methods: For investigation I, 463 non‐neuropathic Japanese participants underwent DPNCheck examinations. Regression formulas calculating the normal limits of Amp and conduction velocity (Japanese regression formulas [JRF]) were determined by quantile regression and then compared with regression formulas of individuals from the USA (USRF). For investigation II, in 92 Japanese diabetes patients, 'probable DSPN' was diagnosed and nerve conduction abnormalities (NCA1: one or more abnormalities, and NCA2: two abnormalities in Amp and conduction velocity) were determined. Validity of NCAs to identify 'probable DSPN' was evaluated by determining sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility (kappa‐coefficient) and the area under the curve of receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: For investigation I, JRF was different from USRF, and normal limits by JRF were higher than that of USRF. The prevalence of Amp abnormality calculated by JRF was significantly higher than that of USRF. For investigation II, the sensitivity, specificity and reproducibility of NCA1 and NCA2 judged from JRF were 85%, 86% and 0.57, and 43%, 100% and 0.56, respectively. These values of JRF were higher than those of USRF. The area under the curve of JRF (0.89) was larger than USRF (0.82). Conclusions: A significant difference in the normal limits of nerve conduction parameters by DPNCheck between Japanese and USA individuals was suggested. Validity to identify DSPN of NCAs might improve by changing the judgment criteria from USRF to JRF. Abstract : Significant difference in normal limits of nerve conduction parameters by a Point‐of‐Care Sural Nerve Conduction Device (DPNCheck) between Japanese and US subjects is suggested. The validity to identify diabetic symmetric sensorimotor polyneuropathy of nerve conduction study using DPNCheck may improve by changing judgement criteria from the regression formula of US people to that of Japanese.