Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorSelçuk, Barın
dc.contributor.authorFidanci, Seda
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-29T12:07:05Z
dc.date.available2020-12-29T12:07:05Z
dc.date.submitted2015
dc.date.issued2018-08-06
dc.identifier.urihttps://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/408693
dc.description.abstractÖZETGiriş ve Amaç: Karpal tünel sendromu (KTS), median sinirin el bileğinde karpal tünelde sıkışması sonucu oluşan bir tuzak nöropatidir. KTS tanısı klinik bulgular ve fizik muayene ile konulur, elektrofizyolojik çalışmalarla kesinleştirilir. Semptom ve bulguları olan ancak standart elektrofizyolojik teknikler kullanılarak tanı konulamayan ya da KTS'nin çok erken dönemlerinde tünel proksimalindeki yavaşlamanın gölgelendiği hastalarda rutin ileti çalışmaları yeterli olamamakta ve sinir ileti karşılaştırma testlerine gereksinim duyulabilmektedir.Bu çalışmada klinik ve elektrofizyolojik olarak KTS tanısı konulmuş hastalarda elektrofizyolojik değerlendirmede kullanılan karşılaştırmalı testlerin tanısal etkinliklerinin ve duyarlılıklarının karşılaştırılması amaçlandı.Materyal Metod: Prospektif olarak yapılan bu çalışmada KTS ön tanısı ile elektrofizyoloji laboratuvarına yönlendirilen toplam 106 hasta incelendi. Klinik ve elektrofizyolojik olarak normal değerlendirilen 64 el kontrol grubunu oluştururken, elektrofizyolojik olarak KTS tespit edilen 89 el minimal, hafif ve orta KTS olarak sınıflandırıldı. Ağır ve çok ağır KTS olarak değerlendirilen 25 el çalışmaya dahil edilmedi. Hasta ve kontrol grubuna rutin elektrofizyolojik çalışmaların yanı sıra median-radial sinir 1. parmaktan kayıtla duyusal ileti çalışmaları ve interpik latans farkları, median-ulnar sinir 4. parmaktan kayıtla duyusal ileti çalışmaları ve interpik latans farkları, median-ulnar 2. lumbrikal-interosseöz kayıtla motor ileti çalışmaları ve interpik latans farkları ve median-ulnar karma sinir ileti çalışmaları ve interpik latans farkları değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Çalışmamızda toplam 94 kişinin 178 eli değerlendirmeye alındı. Toplam 178 elin 88'i (%49,4) sağ el, 90'ı (%50,6) sol el idi. Elektrofizyolojik olarak KTS tespit edilen 114 elin gruplandırılmasında 13 el (%11,4) minimal, 36 el (%31,6) hafif, 40 el (%35,3) orta, 14 el (%12,20) ağır, 11 el (%9,5) çok ağır KTS olarak değerlendirildi.Elektrofizyolojik olarak minimal, hafif ve orta düzeyde KTS tespit edilen 89 elin %40,4'ünde Tinel testi, %74,2'sinde Phalen testi, %60,7'sinde ters Phalen testi, %76,4'ünde Frick testi, %44,9'unda Durkan testi pozitif olarak bulundu. Tüm evrelerde elektofizyolojik olarak KTS saptanan hastalarda provakatif testlerden en az birinin pozitif olma oranı ise %100'dü.Tüm evrelerde genel olarak en duyarlı test %88,76 ile median- radial 1. parmak interpik distal latans farkı, en özgül test ise %100 ile median-ulnar 2. lumbrikal-interosseöz distal latans farkı olarak bulunmuştur. Elektrofizyolojik olarak KTS saptanan ellerde grup içerisinde minimal grupta duyarlılığı en yüksek test %84,62 ile median-radial 1. parmak interpik latans farkı ile median-ulnar 4. parmak interpik latans farkı testleri, özgüllüğü en yüksek test ise %93,65 ile median-ulnar karma latans farkı olarak tespit edilmiştir. Median-ulnar 1. parmak interpik distal latans farkı testi %77,78 ile hafif grupta duyarlılığı en yüksek test iken bu grupta en özgül test %90,62 ile 4. parmak median-ulnar interpik distal latans farkı testi bulunmuştur. Orta grupta da en duyarlı test %100 ile 1. parmak median-ulnar interpik distal latans farkı testi, en özgül test de %100 ile 4. parmak median-ulnar interpik distal latans farkı testi bulunmuştur. Orta grupta duyarlılık ve özgüllük değerleri genel olarak birbirine yakın olarak tespit edilmiştir. Hem özgüllüğü hem de duyarlılığı birbirine en yakın karşılaştırma testi ise minimal ve orta grupta median- radial 1. parmak interpik latans farkı, hafif grupta ise median-ulnar karma interpik latans farkı olarak saptanmıştır.Sonuçlar: Klinikte KTS semptom ve bulguları olan fakat standart elektrofizyolojik yöntemlerle tanı konulamayan olguları saptamada rutin elektrofizyolojik çalışmalara ek olarak karşılaştırmalı testler kullanılabilir.Anahtar kelimeler: Karpal Tünel Sendromu, elektrofizyoloji, EMG, karşılaştırma testleri.
dc.description.abstractABSTRACTAim: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is an entrapment neuropathy occurs as a result of compression of median nerve in the carpal tunnel at the wrist. CTS is diagnosed by clinical signs and physical examination, and confirmed by electrophysiological study. In patients with signs and symptoms of disease but no diagnosis with standard electrophysiological techniques or with hidden slowdown at proximal part of tunnel in very early stages of CTS, routine conduction studies are not adequate and nerve conduction comparison tests are needed. In this study, it was aimed to compare diagnostic efficiency and sensitivity of comparative tests that are used for electrophysiological evaluation in patients with clinically and electrophysiologically diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome.Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, 106 patients who had been referred to the electrophysiology laboratory with the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome were examined. Clinically and electrophysiologically normal evaluated 64 hands constituted the control group and 89 hands with electrophysiologically detected CTS were classified as minimal, mild and moderate CTS. 25 hands with severe and very severe CTS were not included in the study. As well as routine electrophysiological studies, patients and control group underwent sensory conduction studies and interpeak latency differences of median-radial nerve recorded from 1st digit, sensory conduction studies and interpeak latency differences of median-radial nerve recorded from 4th digit, motor conduction studies and interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 2nd lumbrical-interosseous, median-ulnar mixed nerve conduction studies and interpeak latency differences.Results: In this study, 178 hands of a total of 94 people were evaluated. Of 178 hands; 88 (49.4%) were right hands and 90 (50.6%) were left hands. Of 114 hands with electrophysiologically detected CTS; 13 (11.4%) hands had minimal, 36 (31.6%) hands had mild, 40 (35.3%) hands had moderate, 14 (12.20%) hands had severe and 11 (9.5%) hands had very severe CTS. In 89 hands with electrophysiologically detected minimal, mild and moderate carpal tunnel syndrome, 40.4% had positive Tinel's test, 74.2% had positive Phalen's test, 60.7% had positive reverse Phalen's test, 76.4% had positive Flick test and 44.9% had positive Durkan's test. In all stages of electrophysiologically detected carpal tunnel syndrome, the ratio of at least one positive provocative test was 100%. In all stages, the overall most sensitive test was interpeak latency differences of median-radial nerve recorded from 1st digit with a rate of 88.76% and the most specific test was interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 2nd lumbrical-interosseous with a rate of 100%. Within groups, the most sensitive tests were interpeak latency differences of median-radial nerve recorded from 1st digit and median-ulnar nerve recorded from 4th digit with a rate of 84.62% and the most specific test was mixed latency differences of median-ulnar nerve with a rate of 93.65%. In patients with mild CTS, most sensitive test was interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 1st digit with a rate of 77.78% and interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 4th digit was the most specific test with a rate of 90.62%. In patients with moderate CTS, most sensitive test was interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 1st digit with a rate of 100% and interpeak latency differences of median-ulnar nerve recorded from 4th digit was the most specific test with a rate of 100%. Sensitivity and specificity in the moderate group was determined to be generally similar.The comparison test with closest sensitivity and specificity was interpeak latency differences of median-radial nerve recorded from 1st digit in minimal and moderate groups and mixed latency differences of median-ulnar nerve in mild group.Conclusion: For diagnosis of patients with clinical signs and symptoms of CTS and no electrophysiologically proven diagnosis, comparative tests can be used in addition to routine electrophysiological studies. Keywords: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Electrophysiology, EMG, Comparison tests.en_US
dc.languageTurkish
dc.language.isotr
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 United Statestr_TR
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectFiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyontr_TR
dc.subjectPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitationen_US
dc.titleKarpal tünel sendromunda kullanılan farklı tanısal elektrofizyolojik yöntemlerin değerlendirilmesi
dc.title.alternativeAssesment of the different electrophysiological tests in carpal tunnel syndrome
dc.typedoctoralThesis
dc.date.updated2018-08-06
dc.contributor.departmentFiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı
dc.identifier.yokid10069688
dc.publisher.instituteTıp Fakültesi
dc.publisher.universityKOCAELİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ
dc.type.submedicineThesis
dc.identifier.thesisid480863
dc.description.pages101
dc.publisher.disciplineDiğer


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess