The Effectiveness of Sympathetic Skin Response Studies for Patients with Primary Palmar Hyperhidrosis and Who Undergo Thoracic Sympathicotomy

일차성 수부 다한증에서 교감신경절제술 후 교감신경 피부반응 검사의 효용성

  • Yoon, Jeong-Seob (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine) ;
  • Sim, Sung-Bo (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine) ;
  • Rhee, Won-Ihl (Department of Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea College Medicine)
  • 윤정섭 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 흉부외과학교실) ;
  • 심성보 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 흉부외과학교실) ;
  • 이원일 (가톨릭대학교 의과대학 재활의학교실)
  • Published : 2009.12.05

Abstract

Background: There is no standardized tool and parameter that can accurately assess the sympathetic function before and after performing sympathectomy in patients with primary palmar hyperhidrosis. We examined the effective-ness of the sympathetic skin response (SSR) study for documenting the change of sympathetic denervation before and after performing selective thoracic sympathicotomy. Material and Method: We prospectively investigated the SSR from 12 healthy subjects who were diagnosed with primary hyperhidrosis. Each SSR was recorded on the right palm or sole with electrical stimuli applied to the skin at the left wrist and foot and vice versa for the controlateral side. This test was performed before, 2 weeks and 1 year after selective thoracic sympathicotomy. The data was corrected for the onset latency and the amplitude of the SSR (n=24). Result: The mean age of the 12 patients was $24.6{\pm}0.4$ years (range: 19~36) and the gender ratio was 1 : 0.7. The mean values of the preoperative, postoperative 2 weeks and postoperative 1 year onset latency and amplitude of the palmar side (n=24) were $1.46{\pm}0.24$ msec and $6,043{\pm}2,339{\mu}V$, $1.63{\pm}0.42$ msec and $823{\pm}638{\mu}V$, and $1.44{\pm}0.39$ msec and $2,412{\pm}1,546{\mu}V$, respectively. The mean values of the plantar side (n=38) were $1.83{\pm}0.42$ msec and $2,816{\pm}1,694{\mu}V$, $2.16{\pm}0.39$ msec and $1,445{\pm}1,281{\mu}V$ and $1.95{\pm}0.25$ msec and $1,622{\pm}865{\mu}V$, respectively. Among the documented parameters, only the palmar amplitude (p=0.002) showed statistical significance in recording the change of the sympathetic system within the same individual for the pre and postoperative period. Conclusion: The SSR amplitude ratio may be a useful parameter for documenting the efficacy of sympathetic denervation after selective sympathicotomy.

배경: 일차성 수부다한증 환자에서 교감신경절제술 전후의 교감신경 작용의 변화를 정확하게 비교 평가할 수 있는 표준화된 수단이나 변수가 없다. 저자들은 선택적인 흉부 교감신경 절제술 전후의 교감신경차단의 효과를 평가하는 방법으로서의 교감신경 피부반응 검사에 대한 효율성을 측정하였다. 대상 및 방법: 일차성 수부다한증으로 진단 받은 12명의 환자에서 교감신경 피부반응을 확인하였다. 교감신경 피부반응은 좌측 손목과 발목에 전기적 자극을 준 후 우측 손바닥이나 발바닥에서 측정하였고, 반대 편에 대해서도 같은 방법으로 실시하였다. 검사는 선택적 흉부 교감신경 절제술 이전, 절제술 시행 후 2주 그리고 1년 후에 시행하였다. 검사 자료는 발생 잠복기와 교감신경 피부반응의 크기에 대하여 보정하였다. 결과: 평균 연령은 $24.6{\pm}0.4$세(19~36세)이었으며, 남녀 성비는 1 : 0.7이었다. 손바닥(n=24)의 술전, 술후 2주, 1년의 교감신경 피부반응의 평균 잠복기와 진폭은 각각 $1.46{\pm}0.24$ msec와 $6,043{\pm}2,339{\mu}V$, $1.63{\pm}0.42$ msec와 $823{\pm}638{\mu}V$, $1.44{\pm}0.39$ msec와 $2,412{\pm}1,546{\mu}V$이었으며, 발바닥(n=24)은 각각 $1.83{\pm}0.42$ msec와 $2,816{\pm}1,694{\mu}V$, $2.16{\pm}0.39$ msec와 $1,445{\pm}1,281{\mu}V$, $1.95{\pm}0.25$ msec와 $1,622{\pm}865{\mu}V$이었다. 교감신경 피부반응검사상 손바닥에서의 진폭의 감소성 변화는 통계적으로 의미가 있었다(p=0.002). 결론: 수부다한증으로 흉부교감신경 절제술을 받은 환자의 수술 전후 시행한 흉부 교감신경 피부반응 검사에서 진폭은 교감신경의 기능과 연관이 있으며 특히 한 개체 내에서 교감신경의 기능변화를 추적 관찰하는 데에 유용할 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Adar R, Kurchin A, Zweig A, Mozes M. Palmar hyperhidrosis and its surgical treatment: a report of 100 cases. Ann Surg 1977;186:34-41 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-197707000-00006
  2. Lin TS, Kuo SJ, Chou MC. Uniportal endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy for treatment of palmar and axillary hyperhidrosis: analysis of 2000 cases. Neurosurgery 2002;51(5 suppl): S84-7
  3. Baba M, Watahiki Y, Matsunaga M, Takebe K. Sympathetic skin response in healthy man. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988;28:277-83
  4. Shivji ZM, Ashby P. Sympathetic skin responses in hereditary sensory and autonomic neuropathy and familial amyloid neuropathy are different. Muscle Nerve 1999;22:1283-6 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199909)22:9<1283::AID-MUS19>3.0.CO;2-#
  5. Baser SM, Meer J, Polinsky RJ, Hallet M. Sudomotor function in autonomic failure. Neurology 1991;41:1564-6 https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.41.10.1564
  6. Cronin KD, Kirsner LG. Assessment of sympathectomy - the skin potential response. Anaesth Intensive Care 1979;7:353-7
  7. Vetrugno R, Liguori R, Cortelli P, Montagna P. Sympathetic skin response: basic mechanisms and clinical applications. Clin Auton Res 2003;13:256-70 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10286-003-0107-5
  8. Lefaucheur JP, Fitoussi M, Becquemin JP. Abolition of sympathetic skin responses following endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy. Muscle Nerve 1996;19:581-6 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199605)19:5<581::AID-MUS5>3.0.CO;2-7
  9. Shahani BT, Halperin JJ, Boulu P, Cohen J. Sympathetic skin response - a method of assessing unmyelinated axon dysfunction in peripheral neuropathies. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1984;47:536-42 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.47.5.536
  10. Kazemi B, Yahyaii L, Salmanpour R, Hadianfard MJ, Shirzi ZR. Comparison of sympathetic skin response between palmar hyperhidrotic and normal subjects. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2004;44:51-5
  11. Hashomonai M, Assalia A, Kopelman D. Thoracospic symathectomy for palmar hyperhidrosis. Ablate or resect? Surg Endosc 2001;12:435-41
  12. Hsu CP, Chen CY, Lin CT, Wang JH, Chen CL, Wang PY. Video-assisted thoracoscopic T2 sympathectomy for hyperhidrosis palmaris. J Am Coll Surg 1994;179:59-64
  13. Neumayer CH, Bischof G, Fugger R, et al. Efficacy and safety of thoracoscopic sympathicotomy for hyperhidrosis of the upper limb. Results of 734 sympathicotomies. Ann Chir Gynaecol 2001;90:195-9
  14. Kao MC, Tsai JC, Lai DM, Hsiao YY, Lee YS, Chiu MJ. Autonomic activities in hyperhidrosis patients before, during, and after endoscopic laser sympathectomy. Neurosurgery 1994;34:262-8 https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-199402000-00009
  15. Atkinson JL, Fealey RD. Sympathotomy instead of sympathectomy for palmar hyperhidrosis, minimizing postoperative compensatory hyperhidrosis. Mayo Clin Proc 2003;78: 167-72 https://doi.org/10.4065/78.2.167
  16. Uncini A, Pullman SL, Lovelace RE, Gambi D. The sympathetic skin response: normal values elucidation of afferent components and application limits. J Neurol Sci 1988;87: 299-306 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-510X(88)90254-7
  17. Toyokura M, Murakami K. Reproducibility of sympathetic skin response. Muscle Nerve 1996;19:1481-3 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199611)19:11<1481::AID-MUS13>3.0.CO;2-W
  18. Levy DM, Reid G, Rowley DA, Abraham RR. Quantitative measures of sympathetic skin response in diabetes: relation to sudomotor and neurological function. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992;55:902-8 https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.55.10.902
  19. Lin CC, Telaranta T. Lin-Telaranta classification: the importance of different procedures for different inidications in sympathetic surgery. Ann Chir Gynaecol 2001;90:161-6
  20. Kim OG, Hong JM, Lee SJ, Hong JS, Lee KL, Kim SK. The sympathetic skin responses after thoracic sympathicotomy for patients with palmar hyperhidrosis. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;32:579-83