This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1352458508090922v1 14/7/985    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Nielsen, J. Articles by Polman, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nielsen, J. Articles by Polman, C. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Long-term follow-up of suspected though unconfirmed MS

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, MS Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands jm.nielsen{at}vumc.nl

BMJ Uitdehaag

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, MS Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

CH Polman

Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, MS Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Objective

There is no gold standard diagnostic test for MS, and evaluation of present diagnostic criteria has almost exclusively been done in populations of which the vast majority is prone to develop MS. Patients referred for a potential MS diagnosis in whom ultimately another or no diagnosis is made are seldomly reported in a systematic way. We report, after 7 years, on the diagnoses made in a cohort of patients with suspected though unconfirmed MS.

Methods

We retrieved information on the current diagnosis of all patients who had visited our center between 1998 and 2001 for a second opinion concerning a possible MS diagnosis and in whom no diagnosis had been made at that time.

Results

Seventy-five patients (86%) could be retrieved and cooperated. In seven patients, a diagnosis of MS, in eight patients another neurological diagnosis had been made. In the remaining 60 patients, still no neurological diagnosis had been made.

Conclusions

In potential MS patients seen in a tertiary referral center, the likelihood that a patient who is not diagnosed with MS will in the future develop a neurological disease is small. This study suggests that, in addition to playing a role in diagnosing MS, MRI can be helpful to exclude MS in clinically doubtful cases.

Key Words: diagnosis • MRI • multiple sclerosis

This version was published on August 1, 2008

Multiple Sclerosis, Vol. 14, No. 7, 985-987 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1352458508090922


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?