Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T12:15:40.560Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

31 Differences in motor conductivity velocity (MCV) between Nervus tibialis and Nervus peroneus in case of diabetic polyneuropathy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2014

Senad Drnda
Senad Drnda*
Affiliation:
Neurology Clinic, University Clinic-Sarajevo, Bolnicka 25, 71000 Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, E-mail: almira_drnda@hotmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Posters – Neurology
Information
Acta Neuropsychiatrica , Volume 21 , Issue S2: Special Issue: Abstracts of 49th Neuropsychiatric Pula Congress, 17-20 June 2009, Pula, Croatia , June 2009 , pp. 82
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S

Introduction/Objectives:

Diabetic polyneuropathy represent one of the main complications of diabetes. It belongs to the group of mixed axon dimeilizing sensory and motor polineuropathies. EMNG analysis in case of clinically obvious polyneuropathy verifies slow down of the sensitive and motor conduction velocities of the nerves, especially in lower limbs due to their length.

Goal:

To determine difference of the motor conductivity velocity between N. peroneus and N. tibialis in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.

Participants, Materials/Methods:

For this paper we have randomly selected 30 patients with Diabetes mellitus and with evident clinical signs of diabetic polyneuropathy. In all cases we measured MCV in N. peroneus and N. tibialis with EMNG method and correlated.

Results:

In the sample there was an equal number of male and female patients (15 each gender). Average age was 55.7 years. M: 57.5 and women: 54 years. Average duration of diabetes was 8.8 years. On insulin is 60% (18) patients, and on medications 40% (12). Average MCV in N. peroneus was 38.7 m/s, and MCV in N. tibialis 32.9 m/s. Lowest MCV in N. peroneus was 28.8 m/s, and N. tibialis 23.3 m/s.

Statistical analyses of correlation between MCV in N. peroneus and N. tibialis indicates statistically significant difference in conduction velocity, which is much slower in N. tibialis.

Conclusions:

Based on our research we can conclude that the motor conductivity velocities are much slower in N. tibialis than in N. peroneus in vast majority of cases (87%), and in average are lower by 5.8 m/s, and in 4 cases (13%) MCV were lower MCV in N. peroneus compared to N. tibialis.