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™)

Abstract

Aim/IntroductionStudies 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 MethodsFor 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.ResultsFor 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).ConclusionsA 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.

The utility of a point‐of‐care sural nerve conduction device for detection of diabetic polyneuropathy: A cross‐sectional study

“…Previous studies have mainly investigated the utility of POCD in relation to symptoms and signs of neuropathy, monofilament testing, and 128‐H z tuning fork tests in subjects with diabetes and in patients with chemotherapy‐induced neuropathy . There have been 2 earlier studies comparing the POCD with conventional NCS in 72 and 44 subjects with diabetes.…”

Clinical polyneuropathy does not increase with prediabetes or metabolic syndrome in the Japanese general population

“…All abnormalities were diagnosed in each participant using regression formulas to calculate the normal limit of QVT, AMP and CV. Details of the regression formulas were described in our previous report. As QVT and AMP depend on age, the cut‐off values were adjusted by age.…”

Acupuncture in diabetic peripheral neuropathy—protocol for the randomized, multicenter ACUDPN trial

“…With a 10-s period of measurement, this device can provide the numeric values of velocity (m/s) and amplitude (μV). This device has been validated in several studies as an accurate screening and monitoring instrument for DPN and the evaluation of the risk of diabetic foot [25][26][27].…”