Differentiating Multifocal Motor Neuropathy from Entrapment Neuropathy—A Diagnostic Challenge

US Neurology ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Richard A Rison ◽  
◽  
Said R Beydoun ◽  

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, treatable neuropathy, but good long-term outcomes are dependent on early treatment. Appropriate diagnostic criteria exist for MMN, but it has a heterogeneous clinical presentation, and, when confined to a small group of nerves, its clinical presentation can overlap with entrapment neuropathies. Electrodiagnosis is a useful diagnostic technique but occasionally MMN can be misdiagnosed as entrapment neuropathies. Misdiagnosis should rarely occur since the nerve involvement in MMN is usually not at sites of common nerve entrapment, and the impact of misdiagnosis can be substantial. The treatments of these conditions differ significantly: intravenous immunoglobulin is the standard therapy for MMN, while treatment options for entrapment neuropathies include conservative treatment, such as splinting, corticosteroids, or surgery. Such treatment in MMN may worsen symptoms, potentially leading to progressive motor symptoms, including muscle weakness, atrophy, and significant motor disability. Two exemplary cases are presented, which highlight the importance of differential diagnosis of these conditions. Emerging technologies, such as high-resolution sonography and magnetic resonance neurography, will aid in defining future diagnostic criteria of MMN.

2000 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 919-926 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. M. Van Den Berg-Vos ◽  
H. Franssen ◽  
J. H. J. Wokke ◽  
H. W. Van Es ◽  
L. H. Van Den Berg

Author(s):  
Michael Donaghy

Some causes of focal peripheral nerve damage are self-evident, such as involvement at sites of trauma, tissue necrosis, infiltration by tumour, or damage by radiotherapy. Focal compressive and entrapment neuropathies are particularly valuable to identify in civilian practice, since recovery may follow relief of the compression. Leprosy is a common global cause of focal neuropathy, which involves prominent loss of pain sensation with secondary acromutilation, and requires early antibiotic treatment. Mononeuritis multiplex due to vasculitis requires prompt diagnosis and immunosuppressive treatment to limit the severity and extent of peripheral nerve damage. Various other medical conditions, both inherited and acquired, can present with focal neuropathy rather than polyneuropathy, the most common of which are diabetes mellitus and hereditary liability to pressure palsies. A purely motor focal presentation should raise the question of multifocal motor neuropathy with conduction block, which usually responds well to high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin infusions.


Author(s):  
Aziz Shaibani

Distal arm weakness may be caused by involvement of the intrinsic hand muscles (interossi, thenar and hypothenar muscles, lumbricals) or extrinsic hand muscles (long finger flexors and extensors). ALS is typical for the former type, and IBM is typical for the latter type. Incoordination of skilled finger movement due to cerebellar disease is associated with normal strength. Poor mobility due to joints pain and swelling should not be confused with muscle weakness. Mononeuropathies such as ulnar, radial, median, and AIN,lesions usually cause differential loss of function. Myasthenia sometimes causes weakness of the wrist and finger extensors. A small but distinct group of distal hereditary myopathies should always be borne in mind. Progressive sensorimotor neuropathies are usually associated with sensory symptoms. Multifocal motor neuropathy can be a diagnostic challenge.


Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 535
Author(s):  
Marc Dörner ◽  
Frank Schreiber ◽  
Heike Stephanik ◽  
Claus Tempelmann ◽  
Natalie Winter ◽  
...  

Background: Diagnosis of immune-mediated neuropathies and their differentiation from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can be challenging, especially at early disease stages. Accurate diagnosis is, however, important due to the different prognosis and available treatment options. We present one patient with a left-sided dorsal flexor paresis and initial suspicion of ALS and another with multifocal sensory deficits. In both, peripheral nerve imaging was the key for diagnosis. Methods: We performed high-resolution nerve ultrasound (HRUS) and 7T or 3T magnetic resonance neurography (MRN). Results: In both patients, HRUS revealed mild to severe, segmental or inhomogeneous, nerve enlargement at multiple sites, as well as an area increase of isolated fascicles. MRN depicted T2 hyperintense nerves with additional contrast-enhancement. Discussion: Peripheral nerve imaging was compatible with the respective diagnosis of an immune-mediated neuropathy, i.e., multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) in patient 1 and multifocal acquired demyelinating sensory and motor neuropathy (MADSAM) in patient 2. Peripheral nerve imaging, especially HRUS, should play an important role in the diagnostic work-up for immune-mediated neuropathies and their differentiation from ALS.


2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marc Léger ◽  
Eugen Gavriliuc ◽  
◽  

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, clinically well-defined condition within the spectrum of chronic, immune-mediated neuropathies. A typical patient history involves slowly or stepwise progressive, predominantly distal, asymmetrical limb weakness and muscle wasting, most frequently in the arm, that may have developed over a period of years. As a rare condition, MMN may present a diagnostic challenge for non-specialists and some patients may wait years for a correct diagnosis. Timely and accurate diagnosis is essential for patients with MMN. Unlike some motor neuropathies, MMN is treatable with intravenous immunoglobulin and untreated patients are likely to experience progressive muscle weakness that may result in serious functional impairment and impaired quality of life. The aim of this article is therefore to provide a guide for non-specialist neurologists to the clinical recognition and differential diagnosis of MMN.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1636-1636
Author(s):  
Efstathios Kastritis ◽  
Maria Gavriatopoulou ◽  
Maria Roussou ◽  
Evangelos Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou ◽  
Magdalini Migkou ◽  
...  

Abstract In 2014, the IMWG updated the diagnostic criteria for symptomatic myeloma and in addition to classical "CRAB", implemented "biomarkers of malignancy" (BoM) (FLC ratio>100, more than 1 focal lesion in MRI and bone marrow infiltration of at least 60%). As a result, a subset of patients previously considered as having "smoldering myeloma" were characterized as symptomatic and were eligible to start therapy; these criteria are also adopted in clinical trials. However, the impact of the 2014 IMWG criteria in the overall clinical presentation of symptomatic myeloma patients who start therapy or in the outcomes of patients who present only with biomarkers of malignancy, has not been fully appreciated. We evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of patients who started therapy in the past 5 years, when the 2014 IMWG criteria were implement in our clinical practice and compare their characteristics and outcomes with those of patients that started in an earlier period. To adjust for advances in diagnosis and especially imaging, the analysis included 1007 consecutive patients who started therapy in the Department of Clinical Therapeutics between 1/1/2010 and 31/12/2020. Our prospectively maintained database includes all consecutive patients who start therapy for myeloma. The patients were divided in two cohorts: those that started therapy after 1/1/2015 (after 2014 IMWG criteria implementation) and those that started therapy between 1/1/2010 and 31/12/2014. In these two chronological periods, methods for the assessment of disease were similar except for wider use of ldWBCT after 2013 and more frequent use of conventional CT before 2013. In the 2010-2014 period, 393 patients started therapy vs 614 that started between 2015-2020. Patients in the two groups had similar age (mean 67 vs 66.3, p=0.399) and similar b2-microglobulin levels (7.39 vs 7.33 mg/L, p=0.907) but hemoglobin (mean 10.2 vs 10.6 gr/dl, p=0.016), platelet counts (mean 230 vs 246 x10 9/L, p=0.021), serum albumin (3.6 vs 3.8 gr/dl, p=0.003) were higher in the 2015-2020 era. Although it did not reach statistical significance, mean bone marrow infiltration in trephine biopsy (60.5% vs 57.3%, p=0.056) and eGFR (mean 66.6 vs 62.3 ml/min/ 1.73 m2, p=0.057) were higher and mean serum calcium levels lower (9.9 vs 10.2 mg/dl, p=0.073) in 2015-2020 group, while, serum LDH >ULN (19.6% vs 21.4%, p=0.513) and high risk cytogenetics (20.4% vs 20.8%) were found in similar rates. Accordingly, ISS and R-ISS stage distribution was similar (p=0.496). Per CRAB criteria, hemoglobin < 10 gr/dl was present in 48.9% of patients in the 2010-14 period vs 43.6% in the 2015-2020 (p=0.1), hypercalcemia in 18.2% vs 15% (p=0.185), serum creatinine ≥2 mg/dl in 22% vs 18% (p=0.124) and lytic bone disease in 76.9% vs 76.8%, p=0.973). At least one CRAB was present in 96.4% vs 94% of patients in the two periods (p=0.603). Even in the era before the publication of the 2014 IMWG criteria, 3.6% of patients that started therapy did not fulfill the CRAB criteria of that time; in retrospect, most had at least one BoM present. In the 2015-2020 period, 6% of new patients were considered as symptomatic based on the presence of BoM only. The median follow-up of the 2010-2014 cohort is 63 months and is 25 months for the 2015-2020 group; the 1- and 2-year OS is 83% vs 90% and 75% vs 79% respectively (p=0.057) for the two groups; early mortality (within 3 months from start of therapy) was 7.4% vs 3.9% (p=0.016) respectively. The OS of patients starting therapy based on the presence of BoM only is not reached (3-year OS 87%) vs 59 months (3 year OS: 65%) for patients presenting with CRAB (p=0.051). Because there may be a lead time bias, we also compare the OS of patients with biomarkers of malignancy only vs those with CRAB and ISS-1 disease: OS was similar although with a trend towards better OS for those with BoM. In conclusion, the implementation of the 2014 IMWG diagnostic criteria has resulted in about 6% of newly diagnosed patients starting therapy based only on the presence of BoM. Although the implementation of the criteria has resulted in slightly better clinical presentation (less severe CRAB) and reduced early mortality, most patients still present with disease complications. These data point to the need to develop tools that can identify myeloma patients earlier during their disease course, before they develop devastating complications, in order to further improve their outcomes and quality of life. Disclosures Kastritis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gavriatopoulou: Karyopharm: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Terpos: Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Research Funding. Dimopoulos: Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria.


Author(s):  
Jeffrey A. Cohen ◽  
Justin J. Mowchun ◽  
Victoria H. Lawson ◽  
Nathaniel M. Robbins

Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) may be mistaken for common entrapment neuropathies, although absence of significant sensory findings is a helpful clue to the diagnosis. Multifocal motor neuropathy may also mimic motor neuron disease. Electrophysiological evidence of conduction block at a nerve site not typically prone to compression is consistent with MMN. A positive anti-GM1 antibody also supports the diagnosis. First-line treatment of MMN is intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and the majority of patients have rapid improvement of their weakness. The clinical features, differential diagnosis, investigations, and treatment options are described in this chapter.


Hand ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 599-607
Author(s):  
James M. Gilchrist ◽  
Sudeepta Dandapat

Introduction: Carpal tunnel syndrome and ulnar neuropathy are such common maladies affecting the upper extremties that they often become the default diagnosis when patients complain of numbness, pain, or weakness of the hands. While often correct, there are a number of other conditions that can also cause sensory or motor loss of the hands, which should be considered when appropriate, as they can mimic upper extremity entrapment syndromes. Methods: In this review, we will discuss such mimics, including Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, multifocal motor neuropathy, hereditary neuropathy with pressure palsies, mononeuropathy multiplex, Lewis-Sumner syndrome, brachial plexitis (Parsonage-Turner syndrome), myotonic dystrophy, inclusion body myopathy, and distal myopathy of Welander. We will discuss the clinical presentation, as well as diagnostic testing, treatment (if available), and prognosis. Conclusion: The objective is to provide a differential diagnosis for those patients who do not fit well clinically or respond to usual therapy for entrapment neuropathy of the upper extremities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document