The sensitivity of median versus ulnar palmar mixed nerve study in the early diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome

Abstract

Abstract Background Electrodiagnostic tests (EDX) are the most frequent and applicable studies in early diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), but the definitive sensitive and specific tests are still under study. We aimed to evaluate the role of the median versus ulnar palmar mixed nerve study (Mix M-U), and its sensitivity in comparison to other provocative comparison studies, in supporting the early diagnosis of CTS. This cross-sectional study included 142 idiopathic early CTS hands from 100 patients and 71 hands from 50 healthy subjects as a control group. We did routine median motor and sensory studies and 4 comparative tests namely median versus radial sensory study (MVR), Mix M-U, median versus ulnar sensory study (MVU), and median versus ulnar lumbrical-interossei motor study (LU-IN). Results The routine median motor and sensory latency and amplitude showed a statistically significant difference between CTS and control groups as (p< 0.05) and a highly statistically significant difference between the 2 groups as regards the 4 comparative tests as (p< 0.0001). The specificities of all the 4 comparative tests were higher than 90%. MVR test had the highest sensitivity (92.2%) and followed by Mix M-U study (82.2%) and MVU (78.7%), and the least sensitive test was the LM-IN (66.9%). Conclusions Although the patients’ results fall within the normal range according to the reference range in the literature, it showed a statistically significant difference when compared to controls. A high percentage of those symptomatic patients showed results of typical CTS when tested with the comparative studies so there is a need to use these sensitive tests to diagnose cases with early CTS. According to sensitivity studies, the selection of which tests to do in order is a challenging choice. For the diagnosis of cases with early CTS with a normal ordinary motor and sensory studies, MVR comparative technique appeared as the best sensitive and specific provocative electrophysiological test followed by the Mix M-U test. We recommend the use of a combination of both tests first in the diagnosis of early CTS and if one of them was negative we can use the other comparative studies MVU and then LM-IN studies.