Indian Journal of Pathology and Microbiology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Ahead Of Print Login 
Users Online: 1162
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size


 
  Table of Contents    
REVIEW ARTICLE  
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 65  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 329-336
Role of skin punch biopsy in diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy-A review for the neuropathologist


1 Department of Pathology, Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology, Trivandrum, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India
2 Department of Neuropathology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission27-Jan-2022
Date of Decision18-Feb-2022
Date of Acceptance19-Feb-2022
Date of Web Publication11-May-2022
 

   Abstract 


Over the last three decades, skin punch biopsy has become the gold standard for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathies, including autonomic neuropathies commonly seen in diabetics, patients with HIV, and children with hereditary sensory autonomic neuropathies and toxin-induced neuropathy. Clinical, biochemical, electrophysiological tests are inconclusive, making it difficult to diagnose and initiate treatment. A skin punch biopsy is easy to perform in the outpatient clinic, is highly sensitive, and provides an objective diagnosis. Importantly, it helps avoid performing invasive nerve biopsy in patients with small fiber neuropathy, thereby preventing complications such as non-healing of the biopsy site, which is common in these patients. Secondly, the greatest advantage of skin punch biopsies is that they can be repeated any number of times, unlike a nerve biopsy, and are useful to evaluate disease progression and therapeutic response. More recently, its use has been expanded to the diagnosis of large fiber neuropathies, inherited demyelinating neuropathies, etc., obviating the need for a nerve biopsy. The European Federation of Neurological Societies has published guidelines for evaluation to ensure uniformity with regard to the site of biopsy, processing, and quantification. The evaluation of the skin biopsy involves morphometric assessment of the intraepidermal nerve fiber density using PGP 9.5 immunostained sections by bright-field microscopy. This review focuses on the practical aspects of skin punch biopsy and its utility for the practicing pathologist.

Keywords: Autonomic neuropathy, intraepidermal nerve fiber, morphometry, PGP 9.5, small fiber neuropathy

How to cite this article:
Narasimhaiah D, Mahadevan A. Role of skin punch biopsy in diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy-A review for the neuropathologist. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 2022;65, Suppl S1:329-36

How to cite this URL:
Narasimhaiah D, Mahadevan A. Role of skin punch biopsy in diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy-A review for the neuropathologist. Indian J Pathol Microbiol [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Sep 25];65, Suppl S1:329-36. Available from: https://www.ijpmonline.org/text.asp?2022/65/5/329/345060





   Background Top


Small fiber neuropathy (SFN) is a painful disease affecting small myelinated fibers, unmyelinated fibers, and autonomic fibers associated with significant neurologic morbidity. The thinly myelinated fibers are responsible for cold temperature and sharp pain sensation, unmyelinated fibers for warm sensation and heat pain, and autonomic fibers include postganglionic fibers innervating internal organs and sweat glands.

Patients with SFN can present with pain or a variety of autonomic symptoms such as palpitations, postural giddiness, dry eyes, and abnormal sweating. About half the cases of SFN are idiopathic, while the remaining are secondary to chronic diseases (diabetes, chronic kidney diseases, hyperlipidemia), infections (HIV, Hepatitis C), endocrine disorders (hypothyroidism), autoimmune diseases (Sjogren syndrome, systemic lupus erythematosus, vasculitis), hereditary (Fabry's disease, Tangier's disease) and amyloidosis, among others.

The diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy cannot be made on the evaluation of clinical features alone as conventional methods used in the evaluation of neuropathies, such as nerve conduction studies, are normal in SFN. The diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy involves functional and structural assessment of small nerve fibers. The functional assessment involves autonomic evaluation using tests like quantitative sudomotor axon reflex testing (QSART), quantitative sensory testing (QST), sympathetic skin responses (SSR), thermoregulatory sweat testing (TST), laser-evoked potentials (LEP), and electrochemical skin conductance (ESC). The structural assessment of small fibers requires skin punch biopsy or corneal confocal microscopy.[1],[2],[3] Amongst these tests, the skin punch biopsy has the highest sensitivity (88–90%) and specificity (89–97%)[3] and is considered the gold standard for diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy.

Skin is a densely innervated and highly sensitive organ with different types of sensory nerves as well as autonomic nerve fibers. Sensory nerves innervate the epidermis, dermis, and subcutis. Nerve trunks enter through the subcutis to form a deep nervous plexus at the dermo-subcutaneous junction and a superficial nervous plexus in the subepidermis. Sensory nerves are of four types: Aα fibers (highly myelinated), Aβ fibers (moderately myelinated), Aδ fibers (thinly myelinated), and C fibers (unmyelinated). The Aδ fibers and C fibers convey the thermal and noxious stimuli, and Aβ fibers are responsible for mechanical sensory perception. The thinly myelinated and unmyelinated fibers branch from the subepidermal plexus and either terminate in the dermis or enter the epidermis crossing the dermo-epidermal junction (free nerve endings). These free nerve endings in the epidermis and dermis are called intraepidermal and dermal nerve fibers, respectively, and the former are affected in SFN.[4],[5],[6] Quantifying the densities of these nerve fibers is useful in the diagnosis of SFN, whereas evaluating the innervation of adnexal structures reflects disorders of the autonomic nervous system.


   Skin Biopsy/Skin Punch Biopsy Top


Skin biopsy is useful for investigating small-diameter sensory nerves, unmyelinated intraepidermal nerves, myelinated dermal nerves, and autonomic nerves. Over the last three decades, skin biopsy has gained widespread acceptance as a method of choice to investigate small fiber neuropathy, including small fiber sensory neuropathy and autonomic neuropathy. It can also be a diagnostic alternative to nerve biopsy in some large fiber neuropathies. Skin biopsy is used to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the intraepidermal nerve fibers (IENF) and dermal nerve fibers. In addition, serial skin biopsies can be useful to assess disease progression and response to therapy.[7]

In 2005, the European Federation of Neurological Societies (EFNS) published guidelines for the use of skin biopsies in the evaluation of patients with neuropathy to ensure uniformity with regard to the site of biopsy, processing, and quantification [Table 1]. These guidelines were revised in 2010 by the European Federation of Neurological Societies and the Peripheral Nerve Society.[8]
Table 1: EFNS guidelines for processing of skin punch biopsy for bright-field microscopy

Click here to view


Technique

Skin biopsies are generally performed from the distal leg – 10 cm above the lateral malleolus and from the lateral aspect of the upper thigh, 20 cm below the anterior iliac spine. The biopsy from the upper thigh may provide information regarding a length-dependent process.[7],[8]

The biopsy is performed using a 3 mm disposable punch (hence, also called skin punch biopsy) using local anesthesia. To study epidermal nerves, a superficial biopsy 3–4 mm in depth is sufficient, but a deeper biopsy (6–8 mm deep) is required to study the innervation of hair follicles, sweat glands, and blood vessels.[7],[8]

There are no major complications associated with the skin biopsy. Mild infection and excessive bleeding are two minor complications reported.[8]

Another less-invasive method is the use of a suction cap to remove the epidermis alone. Even though this method does not require local anesthesia, it samples only the superficial layers of the epidermis and dermis, and hence it does not provide information regarding hair follicles and sweat glands.[9]

Processing

The skin biopsy should be immediately fixed in the cold fixative for 24 hours at 4°C, and then transferred to a cryoprotective solution overnight, following which sections can be cut either in a freezing microtome or cryostat.

The fixatives used are 2% paraformaldehyde-lysine periodate (2% PLP) for bright-field microscopy and Zamboni's fixative (2% paraformaldehyde, picric acid) for indirect immunofluorescence with or without confocal microscopy.[10],[11]

50 μm sections are used for the examination of the intraepidermal nerves by bright-field microscopy. For each biopsy, at least 3 step sections should be examined. The initial and last few sections should be excluded to avoid artifacts.[7]

Staining

For diagnostic purposes, bright-field immunohistochemistry[10],[11],[12] or indirect immunofluorescence with or without confocal microscopy can be used. The sections are stained with anti-protein gene product 9.5 (anti-PGP 9.5) antibodies. PGP 9.5 is a ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase and a cytoplasmic neuronal marker.[7]

Staining Procedure (Mahadevan A, et al. - unpublished data)

The sections are floated (in Nunc multi-well plates) in staining reagents containing Triton X-100 to promote penetration of antibodies. Sections are incubated overnight at 4°C in mouse anti-PGP 9.5 antibody (Serotec, 1:5000) after blocking with 3% skimmed milk powder. Sections are washed in three changes of wash buffer on the next day, followed by overnight incubation in HRP-tagged secondary. The antigen visualization is carried out using the streptavidin-biotin-HRP method with SG substrate (Vector Labs, immunoenzymatic method). The peroxidase reaction product is then visualized by bright-field microscopy. Stained sections are transferred to chrome alum gelatin-coated slides and counter-stained with eosin.

Intraepidermal nerve fiber morphometry

Quantification using the bright-field technique

For quantification of intraepidermal nerve fiber density by bright-field immunohistochemistry, the IENF are counted on anti-PGP 9.5 immunostained sections under a light microscope using 40X objective. Counting can also be done using image analysis software. Only single nerve fibers crossing the dermal-epidermal junction should be counted, avoiding secondary branches.[13] The length of the section should be measured in millimeters (mm) using image analysis software such as Image J. The intraepidermal nerve fiber density is expressed as a number of IENF per mm (IENF/mm). For each biopsy, IENF is counted in at least three 50 μm sections, and the average of the counts is taken.

Nerve fiber counting rules:[13]

  • Only nerves crossing the basement membrane into the epidermis are counted.
  • Nerves that branch before crossing the basement membrane are counted as two fibers.
  • Nerves that branch within the basement membrane are counted as two fibers.
  • Nerves that branch after crossing the basement membrane are counted as one fiber.
  • Nerve fragments that cross the basement membrane are counted.
  • Nerve fibers that approach but do not cross the basement membrane are not counted.
  • Epidermal nerve fragments that do not cross the basement membrane are not counted.


The nerve counting rules are shown in [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Cartoon illustrating the nerve counting rules[13] The numerical value mentioned above each fiber indicates the number of intraepidermal nerve fibers counted

Click here to view


Quantification using confocal immunofluorescence technique

For confocal microscopy, 80–100 μm thick sections are cut. The intraepidermal nerve fiber density estimation is performed on images based on a Z-stack of about 16 consecutive optical sections, each at 2 μm intervals.[7] Confocal image acquisition is performed on four epidermal areas (two each from two different sections).[8] Confocal microscopy is more expensive, complicated, and time-consuming.

The IENF density does not vary with the methodology, and there is a good correlation between simple indirect immunofluorescence and bright-field immunohistochemistry.[14] For diagnostic purposes, bright-field immunohistochemistry is considered sufficient.[7]

Normative reference values for bright-field immunohistochemistry

The normative reference values are based on IENF density in healthy controls. Based on published literature, the normative value for healthy subjects in distal leg ranged from 9.8 ± 3.6/mm to 13.8 ± 6.7/mm (mean ± standard deviation).[8] The normative value for healthy subjects in the proximal thigh is 21.1 ± 10.4/mm (mean ± standard deviation).[7] In a large multicenter study with 550 subjects, comprising laboratories from the USA, Europe, and Asia, the IENF density cut-off for skin biopsy from distal leg was calculated at the fifth percentile separately for males and females.[15] IENF density below the lower fifth percentile is considered abnormal. Another study by Collongues, et al.,[16] which included 298 healthy volunteers of the Caucasian population, found some difference with respect to IENF density in females when compared to the multicenter study by Lauria, et al.,[15] which may be due to the heterogeneity of the study population in the latter. The intraepidermal nerve fiber density decreases in the leg from proximal thigh to ankle. In addition, the IENF density is lower in men compared to women and decreases with age.[15],[16] The gender-related difference in IENF density may be related to hormonal status.[17] A few studies have also indicated ethnic differences in IENF density in distal leg.[18],[19] These aspects should be kept in mind while evaluating skin biopsies.

There is no normative data available for intraepidermal nerve fiber density in the distal leg using immunofluorescence with or without confocal microscopy.

Inter and intra-observer variability of IENF quantification

Assessment of reliability of IENF quantification is an important quality control step in using skin punch biopsy for diagnostic purposes in neuropathies. It is essential for each laboratory to compare inter and intra-observer variability of normative reference values. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density quantification in skin punch biopsies is generally considered a reliable technique with good inter and intra-observer correlation.[20],[21] The staining quality and the presence of a well-delineated basement membrane are also important since the presence of a poorly delineated basement membrane can lead to significant inter-observer variability.[22]

Quantification of sweat gland innervation

The quantification of sweat gland innervations is impeded by technical challenges such as the three-dimensional structure of sweat glands, variation in the number and size of glands in each section, increased background with PGP 9.5 staining in sweat glands, and lack of established guidelines for assessment. Gibbons et al.,[23] have described a novel technique to overcome these difficulties.

Qualitative/Morphologic changes in IENF

The morphological changes described in intraepidermal nerve fibers of patients suffering from small fiber neuropathy include axonal swellings and branching.[7] Axonal swellings are defined as axonal enlargement above 1.5 μm in diameter or a two-fold increase in axonal diameter. They are further divided into small (1.5–4 μm) and large (> 4 μm). These swellings are considered as indicators of axonal damage and higher numbers are associated with the presence of neuropathies and their progression.[24] Multiple small swellings are associated with aging, and larger ones are indicators of axonal damage.[16] Another morphological change described in IENF is increased branching with an increased number of branch points associated with sensory neuropathy. In addition, increased complexity of branching is considered a pre-degenerative change preceding the loss of nerve fibers.[11]

Automation in PGP 9.5 staining and quantification of intraepidermal nerve fiber density

The immunostaining for PGP 9.5 is a labor-intensive procedure and challenging for testing large batches of samples in a standardized manner for clinical trials.[25] Likewise, estimation of intraepidermal nerve fiber density by manual counting is time-consuming, observer-dependent, and can be subject to interobserver variability.[26] There is a role for automation for immunostaining[25] as well as IENF quantification.[26],[27] The automated methods are based on fluorescence immunostaining and not immunoperoxidase.[25] The use of automation for staining is less labor-intensive and reduces variation between batches, but there are limitations such as decreased sensitivity for detection of complex branching of epidermal nerve fibers and axonal swellings. The use of automation for IENF quantification requires motorized microscopes and other image acquisition software, which increases the cost. The technical aspects of image acquisition and processing require standardization.[26] Studies on larger cohorts and the establishment of guidelines for clinical application are required before automation can become part of routine diagnostics.

Diagnostic utility of skin biopsy

Skin biopsy in small fiber neuropathies

Skin biopsy is a useful technique to confirm the diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy [Figure 2]. Loss of intraepidermal nerve fibers is considered a histologic hallmark of small fiber neuropathy. Small fiber neuropathy can be idiopathic or secondary [Table 2] with each category accounting for about 50% each. However, with continuous updating of causes of small fiber neuropathy, the idiopathic category is considered closer to 25%.[3]
Figure 2: Skin biopsies in small fiber neuropathy. Biopsy from right ankle stained with PGP 9.5 showing marked reduction in IENFD (arrows) of 1.6/mm (a) compared to age-matched control with IENFD of 8.2/mm (b) Skin biopsy from the ankle (c) showing a reduction in IENFD (3.6/mm) and thigh (d) showing the normal density of 11.2/mm with preserved adnexal innervations (e). [magnification = scale bar]

Click here to view
Table 2: Causes of small fiber neuropathy

Click here to view


A novel way of looking at SFN based on the clinical phenotypes includes four main categories[28]:

  • small fiber sodium channel dysfunction - present with paroxysmal neuropathic pain
  • small fiber-mediated painful neuropathy
  • small fiber-mediated widespread pain (including fibromyalgia)
  • small fiber-mediated autonomic dysfunction.


However, skin biopsy only confirms the presence of SFN but is usually not helpful in identifying the etiology of SFN.

The commonest cause of small fiber neuropathy is diabetes mellitus. The neuropathy may be present before the metabolic syndrome or may develop acutely following glycemic control.[1] The IENF loss does not correlate with the presence of signs and symptoms of neuropathy.[29] Skin biopsy is also a useful tool to monitor the progression of SFN in diabetes.[30] The deficiency of vitamin B12 leads to peripheral neuropathy in about 25% of cases.[31] It is also considered a leading cause of small fiber neuropathy after diabetes mellitus. Skin biopsies from patients with vitamin B12 deficiency show a decrease in intraepidermal nerve fiber density, irrespective of the presence of neuropathic pain.[31]

In HIV infection, distal leg IENF density is associated with a clinical transition to symptomatic distal sensory neuropathy. An IENF density of ≤10/mm was associated with a 14-fold-higher risk of developing neuropathy.[32]

Systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders can also cause SFN. The degree of IENF loss varies in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, Sjogren's syndrome, and rheumatoid arthritis.[33]

Skin biopsies from the distal leg and proximal thigh can be useful in differentiating length-dependent small fiber neuropathy from non-length-dependent sensory ganglionopathy. The leg to thigh IENF density ratio was significantly lower in the former than the latter.[34] This feature may be helpful in the differential diagnosis since length-dependent SFN points towards a toxic or metabolic etiology, and SFN-ganglionopathy indicates a dysimmune etiology.[30]

Skin biopsy in large fiber neuropathies

Skin biopsy can be a useful alternative to nerve biopsy in large fiber neuropathies to study the myelinated dermal nerve fibers and mechanoreceptors. In addition, skin biopsy provides an opportunity to study the nodes of Ranvier and internodal architecture. For the study of myelinated fibers, a skin punch biopsy is applied to glabrous skin at the fingertip or lateral aspect of the finger. The utility of skin biopsies is particularly well-studied in demyelinating disorders such as Charcot-Marie-Tooth (CMT) disease. In CMT1A, skin biopsy showed decreased dermal nerve fiber and IENF densities, as well as shorter internodes. Skin biopsies are also useful in demonstrating tomacula in cases of hereditary neuropathy with pressure palsies (HNPP). Moreover, they are useful in studying the expression of myelin proteins (P0, PMP22, MBP) in CMT.[6],[35],[36],[37],[38] Besides their utility in hereditary neuropathies, skin biopsies are also useful in acquired demyelinating conditions such as Guillian-Barré syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. GBS patients showed decreased epidermal nerve density with associated active nerve degeneration in the dermis. The nerve density in skin biopsies is also correlated with the presence of dysautonomia, disturbances in thermal sensation, and severity of pain in GBS and CIDP.[39],[40],[41]

Skin biopsy in autonomic neuropathies

Skin biopsy shows loss of sudomotor, pilomotor, and vascular nerves, besides IENF loss, and provides information regarding the extent of autonomic involvement. It is also a useful tool for follow-up degeneration of sensory axons.[42] Skin biopsy is also useful in acquired and inherited autonomic neuropathies such as diabetic neuropathy, hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis, Fabry disease hereditary sensory-autonomic neuropathy (HSAN). HSAN is a rare disorder affecting mainly Aδ and C-fibers. Genetic testing and skin biopsy have replaced the need for nerve biopsy in HSAN. In Ross syndrome, a disorder of sweating, skin biopsy showed severe loss of sudomotor and arrector pilorum muscle innervations and decreased IENFs.[43] The skin biopsy may show amyloid deposits and glycosphingolipidic deposits in amyloidosis and Fabry disease, respectively.[30] Besides these, disorders such as antiphospholipid syndrome can also have autonomic dysfunction as the initial manifestation.[44] Skin biopsy in such patients shows reduced sweat gland nerve fiber density, in addition to decreased intraepidermal nerve fiber density.[44]

Skin biopsy in other neurological disorders

In addition to its role in neuropathies, a skin biopsy is also useful in other conditions such as alpha-synucleinopathies, particularly Parkinson's disease (PD),[45] amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS),[46] and fibromyalgia. Alpha-synuclein is a well-characterized biomarker of PD. The phosphorylated isoform of alpha-synuclein (PASN) has been demonstrated to accumulate in peripheral nerve terminals of skin, myenteric plexus, and salivary glands, among others.[45] The minimally invasive nature of the skin punch biopsy makes it an attractive diagnostic tool for the detection of PASN. Alpha-synuclein accumulates mainly in the dermal autonomic nerves innervating the blood vessels, pilomotor muscles, and sweat glands. The sensitivity of skin biopsy in the diagnosis of PD also depends on the site of the biopsy, with proximal sites such as the posterior cervical region demonstrating increased sensitivity when compared to the more distal sites.[47] In addition, a skin biopsy may be useful in distinguishing multiple system atrophy parkinsonism type (MSA-P) from PD with orthostatic hypotension (PD + OH) as both diseases have a similar clinical picture. In MSA-P, PASN deposits are seen in the somatic nerves of the subepidermal plexi, while in PD-OH, the PASN deposits are seen in the autonomic nerves.[48] Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis can be associated with pain, and there is evidence of sensory system involvement in ALS. Skin biopsies from patients with spinal onset ALS show reduced intraepidermal nerve fiber density, while in those with bulbar-onset ALS, the IENF density is normal.[49] However, the intraepidermal nerve fiber loss does not correlate with the onset, severity, or course of the ALS and cannot be used as a diagnostic or prognostic marker.[50] Fibromyalgia is a chronic pain disorder with associated non-specific symptoms and uncertain pathophysiology.[46] Skin biopsies from patients with fibromyalgia show decreased IENF density, indicating the presence of a small fiber neuropathy in about 50% of cases.[51] In addition, decreased IENF density is associated with higher pain intensity.[52] Skin biopsies can also be used for disease surveillance and assessment of response to treatment in fibromyalgia.[53]

Advantages and limitations of skin biopsy

Advantages:

  • Simple and minimally-invasive procedure
  • Can be applied to any site in the body
  • Can be repeated to assess disease progression and response to therapy


Limitations

  • Labor intensive and time-consuming
  • Not readily available in most Centers
  • Dependence on observer accuracy in distinguishing intraepidermal nerve fibers from dermal ones and identifying false-positive staining
  • Bias due to the heterogeneous nature of the neuropathy[54]
  • Skin biopsy results may not always correlate with other neuropathy endpoints[55]
  • Not helpful in identifying the etiology of neuropathy


Data on skin punch biopsy in peripheral neuropathies from India

The normative data on intraepidermal nerve fiber density from India using postmortem samples (Mahadevan A, et al. unpublished data) is shown in [Table 3]. Lower values of IENF compared to other published studies[56],[57],[58] could be due to the use of postmortem controls for normative data; however, ethnic differences also need to be ruled out.
Table 3: Comparison of results of IENF normative data with published studies

Click here to view



   In Conclusion Top


  • Quantification of intraepidermal nerve fiber density in skin biopsy is a useful technique to confirm the diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy.
  • A skin biopsy should be performed and processed as per EFNS recommendations.
  • Quality control at all levels is mandatory.
  • Normative reference values adjusted for age and gender should be established using healthy volunteers.
  • Intra and interobserver variability should be assessed while establishing the normative reference values.
  • The diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy should be based on a comparison with established normative reference values.
  • Training in an established Cutaneous Nerve Laboratory is recommended.


Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Terkelsen AJ, Karlsson P, Lauria G, Freeman R, Finnerup NB, Jensen TS. The diagnostic challenge of small fiber neuropathy: Clinical presentations, evaluations, and causes. Lancet Neurol 2017;16:934-44.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Devigili G, Rinaldo S, Lombardi R, Cazzato D, Marchi M, Salvi E, et al. Diagnostic criteria for small fiber neuropathy in clinical practice and research. Brain 2019;142:3728-36.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Zeidman LA. Advances in the management of small fiber neuropathy. Neurol Clin 2021;39:113-31.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Glatte P, Buchmann SJ, Hijazi MM, Illigens BM, Siepmann T. Architecture of the cutaneous autonomic nervous system. Front Neurol 2019;10:970.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Roosterman D, Goerge T, Schneider SW, Bunnett NW, Steinhoff M. Neuronal control of skin function: The skin as a neuroimmunoendocrine organ. Physiol Rev 2006;86:1309-79.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Myers MI, Peltier AC, Li J. Evaluating dermal myelinated nerve fibers in skin biopsy. Muscle Nerve 2013;47:1-11.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Lauria G, Cornblath DR, Johansson O, McArthur JC, Mellgren SI, Nolano M, et al. EFNS guidelines on the use of skin biopsy in the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathy. Eur J Neurol 2005;12:747-58.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Lauria G, Hsieh ST, Johansson O, Kennedy WR, Leger JM, Mellgren SI, et al. European federation of neurological societies/peripheral nerve society guideline on the use of skin biopsy in the diagnosis of small fiber neuropathy. Report of a joint task force of the european federation of neurological societies and the peripheral nerve society. Eur J Neurol 2010;17:903-12.e44-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Kennedy WR, Wendelschafer-Crabb G. Utility of skin biopsy in diabetic neuropathy. Semin Neurol 1996;16:163-71.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Herrmann DN, Griffin JW, Hauer P, Cornblath DR, McArthur JC. Epidermal nerve fiber density and sural nerve morphometry in peripheral neuropathies. Neurology 1999;53:1634-40.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Lauria G, Holland N, Hauer P, Cornblath DR, Griffin JW, McArthur JC. Epidermal innervation: Changes with aging, topographic location, and in sensory neuropathy. J Neurol Sci 1999;164:172-8.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Polydefkis M, Yiannoutsos CT, Cohen BA, Hollander H, Schifitto G, Clifford DB, et al. Reduced intraepidermal nerve fiber density in HIV-associated sensory neuropathy. Neurology 2002;58:115-9.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Kennedy WR. W-CG, Polydefkis MG., Wendelschafer G. Pathology and quantitation of cutaneous nerves. In: Dyck PJ, Thomas PK, editors. Peripheral Neuropathy. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Saunders; 2005. p. 869-96.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Nolano M, Biasiotta A, Lombardi R, Provitera V, Stancanelli A, Caporaso G, et al. Epidermal innervation morphometry by immunofluorescence and bright-field microscopy. J Peripher Nerv Syst 2015;20:387-91.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Lauria G, Bakkers M, Schmitz C, Lombardi R, Penza P, Devigili G, et al. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density at the distal leg: A worldwide normative reference study. J Peripher Nerv Syst 2010;15:202-7.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Collongues N, Samama B, Schmidt-Mutter C, Chamard-Witkowski L, Debouverie M, Chanson JB, et al. Quantitative and qualitative normative dataset for intraepidermal nerve fibers using skin biopsy. PLoS One 2018;13:e0191614.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Roglio I, Giatti S, Pesaresi M, Bianchi R, Cavaletti G, Lauria G, et al. Neuroactive steroids and peripheral neuropathy. Brain Res Rev 2008;57:460-9.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Ling L, Xue J, Liu Y, Su L, Li H, Jiang Y, et al. Quantitative and morphological study of intraepidermal nerve fiber in healthy individuals. Neurol Res 2015;37:974-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Jin P, Cheng L, Chen M, Zhou L. Low sensitivity of skin biopsy in diagnosing small fiber neuropathy in Chinese Americans. J Clin Neuromuscul Dis 2018;20:1-6.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Bakkers M, Merkies IS, Lauria G, Devigili G, Penza P, Lombardi R, et al. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density and its application in sarcoidosis. Neurology 2009;73:1142-8.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Smith AG, Howard JR, Kroll R, Ramachandran P, Hauer P, Singleton JR, et al. The reliability of skin biopsy with measurement of intraepidermal nerve fiber density. J Neurol Sci 2005;228:65-9.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Wopking S, Scherens A, Haussleiter IS, Richter H, Schuning J, Klauenberg S, et al. Significant difference between three observers in the assessment of intraepidermal nerve fiber density in skin biopsy. BMC Neurol 2009;9:13.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Gibbons CH, Illigens BM, Wang N, Freeman R. Quantification of sweat gland innervation: A clinical-pathologic correlation. Neurology 2009;72:1479-86.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Lauria G, Morbin M, Lombardi R, Borgna M, Mazzoleni G, Sghirlanzoni A, et al. Axonal swellings predict the degeneration of epidermal nerve fibers in painful neuropathies. Neurology 2003;61:631-6.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Van Acker N, Rage M, Sluydts E, Knaapen MW, De Bie M, Timmers M, et al. Automated PGP9.5 immunofluorescence staining: A valuable tool in the assessment of small fiber neuropathy? BMC Res Notes 2016;9:280.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Corra MF, Sousa M, Reis I, Tanganelli F, Vila-Cha N, Sousa AP, et al. Advantages of an automated method compared with manual methods for the quantification of intraepidermal nerve fiber in skin biopsy. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2021;80:685-94.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Seger S, Stritt M, Doppler K, Frank S, Panaite A, Kuntzer T, et al. A semi-automated method to assess intraepidermal nerve fiber density in human skin biopsies. Histopathology 2016;68:657-65.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Levine TD. Small fiber neuropathy: Disease classification beyond pain and burning. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis 2018;10:1179573518771703.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Divisova S, Vlckova E, Srotova I, Kincova S, Skorna M, Dusek L, et al. Intraepidermal nerve-fiber density as a biomarker of the course of neuropathy in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med 2016;33:650-4.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Nolano M, Tozza S, Caporaso G, Provitera V. Contribution of skin biopsy in peripheral neuropathies. Brain Sci 2020;10:989.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Gunes HN, Bekircan-Kurt CE, Tan E, Erdem-Ozdamar S. The histopathological evaluation of small fiber neuropathy in patients with vitamin B12 deficiency. Acta Neurol Belg 2018;118:405-10.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Herrmann DN, McDermott MP, Sowden JE, Henderson D, Messing S, Cruttenden K, et al. Is skin biopsy a predictor of transition to symptomatic HIV neuropathy? A longitudinal study. Neurology 2006;66:857-61.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Goransson LG, Brun JG, Harboe E, Mellgren SI, Omdal R. Intraepidermal nerve fiber densities in chronic inflammatory autoimmune diseases. Arch Neurol 2006;63:1410-3.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
Provitera V, Gibbons CH, Wendelschafer-Crabb G, Donadio V, Vitale DF, Loavenbruck A, et al. The role of skin biopsy in differentiating small-fiber neuropathy from ganglionopathy. Eur J Neurol 2018;25:848-53.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Li J, Bai Y, Ghandour K, Qin P, Grandis M, Trostinskaia A, et al. Skin biopsies in myelin-related neuropathies: Bringing molecular pathology to the bedside. Brain 2005;128:1168-77.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Hartmannsberger B, Doppler K, Stauber J, Schlotter-Weigel B, Young P, Sereda MW, et al. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density as biomarker in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A. Brain Commun 2020;2:fcaa012.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Manganelli F, Nolano M, Pisciotta C, Provitera V, Fabrizi GM, Cavallaro T, et al. Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease: New insights from skin biopsy. Neurology 2015;85:1202-8.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Katona I, Wu X, Feely SM, Sottile S, Siskind CE, Miller LJ, et al. PMP22 expression in dermal nerve myelin from patients with CMT1A. Brain 2009;132:1734-40.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Pan CL, Tseng TJ, Lin YH, Chiang MC, Lin WM, Hsieh ST. Cutaneous innervation in Guillain-Barre syndrome: Pathology and clinical correlations. Brain 2003;126:386-97.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Ruts L, van Doorn PA, Lombardi R, Haasdijk ED, Penza P, Tulen JHM, et al. Unmyelinated and myelinated skin nerve damage in Guillain-Barre syndrome: Correlation with pain and recovery. Pain 2012;153:399-409.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Chiang MC, Lin YH, Pan CL, Tseng TJ, Lin WM, Hsieh ST. Cutaneous innervation in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. Neurology 2002;59:1094-8.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Weis J, Claeys KG, Roos A, Azzedine H, Katona I, Schroder JM, et al. Towards a functional pathology of hereditary neuropathies. Acta Neuropathol 2017;133:493-515.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Nolano M, Provitera V, Perretti A, Stancanelli A, Saltalamacchia AM, Donadio V, et al. Ross syndrome: A rare or a misknown disorder of thermoregulation? A skin innervation study on 12 subjects. Brain 2006;129:2119-31.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Schofield JR. Autonomic neuropathy-in its many guises-as the initial manifestation of the antiphospholipid syndrome. Immunol Res 2017;65:532-42.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Andreasson M, Svenningsson P. Update on alpha-synuclein-based biomarker approaches in the skin, submandibular gland, gastrointestinal tract, and biofluids. Curr Opin Neurol 2021;34:572-7.  Back to cited text no. 45
    
46.
Ghasemi M, Rajabally YA. Small fiber neuropathy in unexpected clinical settings: A review. Muscle Nerve 2020;62:167-75.  Back to cited text no. 46
    
47.
Niemann N, Billnitzer A, Jankovic J. Parkinson's disease and skin. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 2021;82:61-76.  Back to cited text no. 47
    
48.
Donadio V, Incensi A, Rizzo G, De Micco R, Tessitore A, Devigili G, et al. Skin biopsy may help to distinguish multiple system atrophy-parkinsonism from parkinson's disease with orthostatic hypotension. Mov Disord 2020;35:1649-57.  Back to cited text no. 48
    
49.
Truini A, Biasiotta A, Onesti E, Di Stefano G, Ceccanti M, La Cesa S, et al. Small-fiber neuropathy related to bulbar and spinal-onset in patients with ALS. J Neurol 2015;262:1014-8.  Back to cited text no. 49
    
50.
Dalla Bella E, Lombardi R, Porretta-Serapiglia C, Ciano C, Gellera C, Pensato V, et al. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis causes small fiber pathology. Eur J Neurol 2016;23:416-20.  Back to cited text no. 50
    
51.
Grayston R, Czanner G, Elhadd K, Goebel A, Frank B, Uceyler N, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of small fiber pathology in fibromyalgia: Implications for a new paradigm in fibromyalgia etiopathogenesis. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2019;48:933-40.  Back to cited text no. 51
    
52.
Evdokimov D, Frank J, Klitsch A, Unterecker S, Warrings B, Serra J, et al. Reduction of skin innervation is associated with a severe fibromyalgia phenotype. Ann Neurol 2019;86:504-16.  Back to cited text no. 52
    
53.
Kelley MA, Hackshaw KV. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density as measured by skin punch biopsy as a marker for small fiber neuropathy: Application in Patients with Fibromyalgia. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021;11:536.  Back to cited text no. 53
    
54.
Myers MI, Peltier AC. Uses of skin biopsy for sensory and autonomic nerve assessment. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep 2013;13:323.  Back to cited text no. 54
    
55.
Periquet MI, Novak V, Collins MP, Nagaraja HN, Erdem S, Nash SM, et al. Painful sensory neuropathy: Prospective evaluation using skin biopsy. Neurology 1999;53:1641-7.  Back to cited text no. 55
    
56.
McArthur JC, Stocks EA, Hauer P, Cornblath DR, Griffin JW. Epidermal nerve fiber density: Normative reference range and diagnostic efficiency. Arch Neurol 1998;55:1513-20.  Back to cited text no. 56
    
57.
Pan CL, Lin YH, Lin WM, Tai TY, Hsieh ST. Degeneration of nociceptive nerve terminals in human peripheral neuropathy. Neuroreport 2001;12:787-92.  Back to cited text no. 57
    
58.
Goransson LG, Mellgren SI, Lindal S, Omdal R. The effect of age and gender on epidermal nerve fiber density. Neurology 2004;62:774-7.  Back to cited text no. 58
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Anita Mahadevan
Department of Neuropathology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bengaluru - 560 029, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijpm.ijpm_92_22

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    Abstract
   Background
    Skin Biopsy/Skin...
   In Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1190    
    Printed16    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded46    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal