eMedicine Specialties > Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation > Plexopathy

Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy: Differential Diagnoses & Workup

Author: Mark A Wren, MD, MPH, Medical Director, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Texarkana
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Jan 26, 2007

Differential Diagnoses

Acute Poliomyelitis
Radiation-Induced Brachial Plexopathy
Brachial Neuritis
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Cervical Spondylosis
Mononeuritis Multiplex

Other Problems to Be Considered

Neuralgic amyotrophy
Subacromial bursitis
Supraspinatus tendonitis
Paraneoplastic syndrome

Workup

Laboratory Studies

  • A general lab survey, such as a complete metabolic panel, complete blood count, and urinalysis, usually has been obtained by the primary physician and can be used to screen for signs of neoplasm. (More involved studies exist, but they are beyond the scope of this text/specialty.) If a patient is referred for what might be thought of as simple shoulder pain and turns out to have constitutional symptoms (eg, fevers, weight loss, malaise) and signs of brachial plexopathy, other lab tests certainly may be of value. Examples include a carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in a patient with prior colon cancer, a prostate specific antigen (PSA) in a patient with prior prostate cancer, or serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP) in a patient with back pain and pain at rest.

Imaging Studies

  • Plain radiographs of the chest, shoulder, and cervical spine should be obtained to look for neoplastic changes.
  • MRI of the plexus has a high sensitivity (some studies have reported 100%) in detecting neoplastic involvement of the brachial plexus; however, both CT scan and MRI can present difficulty detecting infiltrating neoplasms and distinguishing them from radiation fibrosis. A well-defined mass lesion on CT scans or MRIs is more suggestive of NBP than RBP.
  • Bone scan may be helpful in finding evidence of metastases.
  • Myelography may be more successful at finding epidural metastasis extruding through neural foramina (so-called dumbbell tumor).
  • Positron emission tomography may be useful in identifying metastasis in or near the brachial plexus; FDG-PET identifies tumors not clearly imaged by CT or MR scanning in some patients.

Other Tests

  • The conventional diagnostic procedures for differentiating brachial plexopathy are nerve conduction and electromyography studies. Advances in MRI techniques recently have shown promise as well.
  • In general, electrodiagnostic examination is used to localize a lesion, characterize its pathology, and establish prognosis and facilitate a treatment plan. The key question is whether the limb weakness is due to axonotmetic (dead) or neurapraxic (functionally blocked) axons.
  • Nerve conduction studies (NCS) may reveal axon loss that often is so severe that lower trunk-mediated sensory potentials (eg, ulnar, medial antebrachial) are absent, and motor responses (median and ulnar) are of low amplitude or absent. Needle examination often reveals motor unit potential loss and spontaneous activity. For axonotmetic lesions, the longer regrowth distance (especially for the lower plexus, where reinnervation must reach the hand) indicates a less favorable prognosis. Neurapraxic lesions are observed less commonly in NBP than RBP, but, barring progression of the lesion/mass, function resumes relatively rapidly, and the prognosis is excellent.
  • Comparison of the amplitude of a peripheral evoked response after 7 days with that of the contralateral side can provide an estimate of the degree of injury/recovery. The number of voluntary motor units on needle examination is also a guide to outcome. Peak muscle strength can be regained even with 50% axon loss, although this gain is at the expense of muscle endurance. Remarkably, in muscles where high force or sustained use is not needed, a 90% axon loss might be tolerated, but a year's recovery time might be required. Myokymia is common is RBP, occurring in 50-70% of patients, but it is rare in NBP (4%). Despite the potential utility of electrodiagnostic studies, limitations exist. When pain is the only initial symptom, EMG results may be within the reference range, although the results almost always reveal abnormalities by the time permanent motor and/or sensory deficits are present.
  • Somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) are noninvasive tests that may be used to assess sensory impairments associated with NBP.

Histologic Findings

The histopathology for secondary neoplasms most often involves adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, or, less often, large cell carcinoma. Of the primary neoplasms, schwannomas are encapsulated tumors, and neurofibromas are unencapsulated tumors believed to arise from the near fascicles.

More on Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy

Overview: Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy
Differential Diagnoses & Workup: Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy
Treatment & Medication: Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy
Follow-up: Neoplastic Brachial Plexopathy
References

References

  1. Cross NE, Glantz MJ. Neurologic complications of radiation therapy. Neurol Clin. Feb 2003;21(1):249-77. [Medline].

  2. Dumitru D. Brachial plexopathy and proximal mononeuropathies. In: Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Philadelphia:. Hanley & Belfus Inc;1995:585-642.

  3. Harper CM Jr, Thomas JE, Cascino TL, Litchy WJ. Distinction between neoplastic and radiation-induced brachial plexopathy, with emphasis on the role of EMG. Neurology. Apr 1989;39(4):502-6. [Medline].

  4. Hathaway PB, Mankoff DA, Maravilla KR, et al. Value of combined FDG PET and MR imaging in the evaluation of suspected recurrent local-regional breast cancer: preliminary experience. Radiology. Mar 1999;210(3):807-14. [Medline].

  5. Killer HE, Hess K. Natural history of radiation-induced brachial plexopathy compared with surgically treated patients. J Neurol. Jul 1990;237(4):247-50.

  6. Kim DH, Murovic JA, Tiel RL. A series of 397 peripheral neural sheath tumors: 30-year experience at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center. J Neurosurg. Feb 2005;102(2):246-55.

  7. Kline DG, Judice DJ. Operative management of selected brachial plexus lesions. J Neurosurg. May 1983;58(5):631-49.

  8. Kori SH, Foley KM, Posner JB. Brachial plexus lesions in patients with cancer: 100 cases. Neurology. Jan 1981;31(1):45-50. [Medline].

  9. Lachance DH, O''Neill BP, Harper CM Jr, et al. Paraneoplastic brachial plexopathy in a patient with Hodgkin''s disease. Mayo Clin Proc. Jan 1991;66(1):97-101.

  10. Liang R, Kay R, Maisey MN. Brachial plexus infiltration by non-Hodgkin''s lymphoma. Br J Radiol. Nov 1985;58(695):1125-7. [Medline].

  11. Meador KJ, Richards B, Hunter S, et al. Bibrachial palsy due to paraneoplastic encephalomyelitis. South Med J. Aug 1989;82(8):1053-5. [Medline].

  12. Mukherji SK, Castillo M, Wagle AG. The brachial plexus. Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. Dec 1996;17(6):519-38. [Medline].

  13. Pierce SM, Recht A, Lingos TI, et al. Long-term radiation complications following conservative surgery (CS) and radiation therapy (RT) in patients with early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1992;23(5):915-23. [Medline].

  14. Stewart JB. The brachial plexus. In: Focal Peripheral Neuropathies. New York, NY:. Raven Press Ltd;1993:111-140.

  15. Weber RJ. Rehabilitation issues in plexopathies. In: Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co:. 990-1001.

  16. Wilbourn AJ. Brachial plexus disorders. In: Peripheral Neuropathy, PDPTJE. Philadelphia:. WB Saunders Co;1993:911-50.

  17. Wilbourn AJ. Electrodiagnosis of plexopathies. Neurol Clin. Aug 1985;3(3):511-29. [Medline].

Further Reading

Keywords

brachial plexus tumors, neoplasms of the brachial plexus, metastatic brachial plexopathy, neoplastic brachial palsy

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Mark A Wren, MD, MPH, Medical Director, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, HealthSouth Rehabilitation Hospital of Texarkana
Mark A Wren, MD, MPH is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Medical Association, and Texas Medical Association
Disclosure: none None None

Medical Editor

Robert J Kaplan, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Kansas School of Medicine and Medical Center
Robert J Kaplan, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, Association of Academic Physiatrists, International Spine Intervention Society, and Physiatric Association of Spine, Sports and Occupational Rehabilitation
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Managing Editor

Michael T Andary, MD, MS, Residency Program Director, Associate Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine
Michael T Andary, MD, MS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Medical Association, and Association of Academic Physiatrists
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

CME Editor

Kelly L Allen, MD, Consulting Staff, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Lourdes Regional Rehabilitation Center, Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Robert H Meier III, MD, Director, Amputee Services of America, Presbyterian St Luke's Hospital; Consulting Staff, North Valley Rehabilitation Hospital, Kindred Hospital, and North Suburban Hospital
Robert H Meier III, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and Association of Academic Physiatrists
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.