Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Wiley, European Journal of Neurology, 8(30), p. 2177-2196, 2023

DOI: 10.1111/ene.15831

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Joint European Academy of Neurology–European Pain Federation–Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

AbstractBackground and PurposeIn these guidelines, we aimed to develop evidence‐based recommendations for the use of screening questionnaires and diagnostic tests in patients with neuropathic pain (NeP).MethodsWe systematically reviewed studies providing information on the sensitivity and specificity of screening questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing, neurophysiology, skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy. We also analysed how functional neuroimaging, peripheral nerve blocks, and genetic testing might provide useful information in diagnosing NeP.ResultsOf the screening questionnaires, Douleur Neuropathique en 4 Questions (DN4), I‐DN4 (self‐administered DN4), and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) received a strong recommendation, and S‐LANSS (self‐administered LANSS) and PainDETECT weak recommendations for their use in the diagnostic pathway for patients with possible NeP. We devised a strong recommendation for the use of skin biopsy and a weak recommendation for quantitative sensory testing and nociceptive evoked potentials in the NeP diagnosis. Trigeminal reflex testing received a strong recommendation in diagnosing secondary trigeminal neuralgia. Although many studies support the usefulness of corneal confocal microscopy in diagnosing peripheral neuropathy, no study specifically investigated the diagnostic accuracy of this technique in patients with NeP. Functional neuroimaging and peripheral nerve blocks are helpful in disclosing pathophysiology and/or predicting outcomes, but current literature does not support their use for diagnosing NeP. Genetic testing may be considered at specialist centres, in selected cases.ConclusionsThese recommendations provide evidence‐based clinical practice guidelines for NeP diagnosis. Due to the poor‐to‐moderate quality of evidence identified by this review, future large‐scale, well‐designed, multicentre studies assessing the accuracy of diagnostic tests for NeP are needed.