| Title |
Small Fiber Neuropathy: Is Skin Biopsy the Holy Grail?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-012-0280-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giuseppe Lauria, Raffaella Lombardi |
| Abstract |
Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is characterized by negative sensory symptoms (thermal and pinprick hypoesthesia) reflecting peripheral deafferentation and positive sensory symptoms and signs (burning pain, allodynia, hyperalgesia), which often dominate the clinical picture. In patients with pure SFN, clinical and neurophysiologic investigation do not show involvement of large myelinated nerve fiber making the diagnosis of SFN challenging in clinical practice. Over the last 15 years, skin biopsy has emerged as a novel tool that readily permits morphometric and qualitative evaluation of somatic and autonomic small nerve fibers. This technique has overcome the limitations of routine neurophysiologic tests to detect the damage of small nerve fibers. The recent availability of normative reference values allowed clinicians to reliably define the diagnosis of SFN in individual patients. This paper reviews usefulness and limitations of skin biopsy and the relationship between degeneration and regeneration of small nerve fibers in patients with diabetes and metabolic syndrome. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 52 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 24% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 55% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 April 2013.
All research outputs
#15,270,698
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#645
of 1,004 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,266
of 163,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#9
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,004 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 163,573 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.