Correlation and dissociation of electrophysiology and histopathology in the assessment of toxic neuropathy.

Joseph C. Arezzo, Mona S. Litwak, Elena G. Zotova

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The evaluation of neurotoxic damage involves a unique set of challenges. Vulnerable structures, such as neocortex, hippocampus, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve are complex and sharply differentiated; deficits can result from insults to one or more element(s) in the system (e.g., myelin, axon, soma, synapse, or glia). In-life assessment of neurotoxic damage is complicated by the relative inaccessibility of structures in the brain and spinal cord, and recovery is severely limited. Histopathology and electrophysiology represent two of the most commonly used and valuable techniques in this field. This review outlines the strengths and limitations of these procedures and focuses on circumstances in which findings from these measures are dissociated. Electrophysiology is noninvasive and affords a longitudinal view of onset and progression of deficits; however, measures are generally weighted to large-diameter myelinated axons and to regions of primary sensory and motor processing. Histology is a highly validated biomarker, but it is restricted by sampling issues and is insensitive to some elements of neurotoxicity (e.g., altered channel function) associated with profound functional consequences. The central tenet of the discussion is that histology and electrophysiology offer complementary views of neurotoxic damage and, whenever possible, they should be used in concert.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)46-51
Number of pages6
JournalToxicologic Pathology
Volume39
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Electrophysiology
Poisons
Histology
Axons
Spinal Cord
Spinal Nerves
Neocortex
Carisoprodol
Biomarkers
Myelin Sheath
Peripheral Nerves
Neuroglia
Synapses
Hippocampus
Brain
Sampling
Recovery
Processing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Toxicology
  • Cell Biology
  • Molecular Biology

Cite this

Correlation and dissociation of electrophysiology and histopathology in the assessment of toxic neuropathy. / Arezzo, Joseph C.; Litwak, Mona S.; Zotova, Elena G.

In: Toxicologic Pathology, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2011, p. 46-51.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b5b28e0016894407b07d3512b97f30fe,
title = "Correlation and dissociation of electrophysiology and histopathology in the assessment of toxic neuropathy.",
abstract = "The evaluation of neurotoxic damage involves a unique set of challenges. Vulnerable structures, such as neocortex, hippocampus, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve are complex and sharply differentiated; deficits can result from insults to one or more element(s) in the system (e.g., myelin, axon, soma, synapse, or glia). In-life assessment of neurotoxic damage is complicated by the relative inaccessibility of structures in the brain and spinal cord, and recovery is severely limited. Histopathology and electrophysiology represent two of the most commonly used and valuable techniques in this field. This review outlines the strengths and limitations of these procedures and focuses on circumstances in which findings from these measures are dissociated. Electrophysiology is noninvasive and affords a longitudinal view of onset and progression of deficits; however, measures are generally weighted to large-diameter myelinated axons and to regions of primary sensory and motor processing. Histology is a highly validated biomarker, but it is restricted by sampling issues and is insensitive to some elements of neurotoxicity (e.g., altered channel function) associated with profound functional consequences. The central tenet of the discussion is that histology and electrophysiology offer complementary views of neurotoxic damage and, whenever possible, they should be used in concert.",
author = "Arezzo, {Joseph C.} and Litwak, {Mona S.} and Zotova, {Elena G.}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1177/0192623310390231",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "46--51",
journal = "Toxicologic Pathology",
issn = "0192-6233",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correlation and dissociation of electrophysiology and histopathology in the assessment of toxic neuropathy.

AU - Arezzo, Joseph C.

AU - Litwak, Mona S.

AU - Zotova, Elena G.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - The evaluation of neurotoxic damage involves a unique set of challenges. Vulnerable structures, such as neocortex, hippocampus, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve are complex and sharply differentiated; deficits can result from insults to one or more element(s) in the system (e.g., myelin, axon, soma, synapse, or glia). In-life assessment of neurotoxic damage is complicated by the relative inaccessibility of structures in the brain and spinal cord, and recovery is severely limited. Histopathology and electrophysiology represent two of the most commonly used and valuable techniques in this field. This review outlines the strengths and limitations of these procedures and focuses on circumstances in which findings from these measures are dissociated. Electrophysiology is noninvasive and affords a longitudinal view of onset and progression of deficits; however, measures are generally weighted to large-diameter myelinated axons and to regions of primary sensory and motor processing. Histology is a highly validated biomarker, but it is restricted by sampling issues and is insensitive to some elements of neurotoxicity (e.g., altered channel function) associated with profound functional consequences. The central tenet of the discussion is that histology and electrophysiology offer complementary views of neurotoxic damage and, whenever possible, they should be used in concert.

AB - The evaluation of neurotoxic damage involves a unique set of challenges. Vulnerable structures, such as neocortex, hippocampus, spinal cord, and peripheral nerve are complex and sharply differentiated; deficits can result from insults to one or more element(s) in the system (e.g., myelin, axon, soma, synapse, or glia). In-life assessment of neurotoxic damage is complicated by the relative inaccessibility of structures in the brain and spinal cord, and recovery is severely limited. Histopathology and electrophysiology represent two of the most commonly used and valuable techniques in this field. This review outlines the strengths and limitations of these procedures and focuses on circumstances in which findings from these measures are dissociated. Electrophysiology is noninvasive and affords a longitudinal view of onset and progression of deficits; however, measures are generally weighted to large-diameter myelinated axons and to regions of primary sensory and motor processing. Histology is a highly validated biomarker, but it is restricted by sampling issues and is insensitive to some elements of neurotoxicity (e.g., altered channel function) associated with profound functional consequences. The central tenet of the discussion is that histology and electrophysiology offer complementary views of neurotoxic damage and, whenever possible, they should be used in concert.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79959505535&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79959505535&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0192623310390231

DO - 10.1177/0192623310390231

M3 - Article

C2 - 21119050

AN - SCOPUS:79959505535

VL - 39

SP - 46

EP - 51

JO - Toxicologic Pathology

JF - Toxicologic Pathology

SN - 0192-6233

IS - 1

ER -