Failure to develop multiple sclerosis in patients with neurologic symptoms without objective evidence

Abstract

Background

Many patients referred to multiple sclerosis (MS) centers with symptoms suggestive of MS are found to have normal neurologic examinations, normal or non-specific brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan findings, and normal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Persistent symptoms often lead to multiple consultations and repeated diagnostic investigations. We performed a study to evaluate the diagnostic utility of repeated evaluations in patients with normal initial assessments and persistent neurologic symptoms.

Methods

143 patients were evaluated initially and 109 returned for a second evaluation after a mean interval of 4.4 years.

Results

All 143 patients had normal initial examinations, brain MRI scans, screening blood tests, and CSF studies. Spinal cord imaging was normal in all patients tested (cervical cord, n = 126; 88.1%; thoracic cord, n = 58; 40.6%). Evoked potential studies were abnormal in a small percentage of patients: visual evoked potentials, VEP (8.1%), somatosensory evoked potentials, SSEP (4.9%), and brainstem auditory evoked potentials, BAEP (2.8%). All follow-up patients (n = 109) had normal examinations and MRI scans. Repeat CSF studies (n = 35; 32.1%) and spinal cord imaging (cervical cord n = 57; 52.3%; thoracic cord n = 32; 29.4%) were normal in all follow-up patients tested. No patients at initial presentation or at follow-up fulfilled diagnostic criteria for MS.

Conclusions

Patients and clinicians may be reassured that persistent neurologic symptoms in the absence of objective clinical evidence do not lead to the development of MS. Costly serial investigations should be carefully considered, particularly in the presence of normal neurologic examination at follow-up.

Keywords

multiple sclerosis CNS symptoms demyelinating disease diagnostic criteria

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1 Levin N Mor M Ben-Hur T . Patterns of misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Isr Med Assoc J 2003; 5: 489 – 490 .

2 Carmosino MJ Brousseau KM Arciniegas DB Corboy JR . Initial evaluations for multiple sclerosis in a university multiple sclerosis center: outcomes and role of magnetic resonance imaging in referral. Arch Neurol 2005; 62: 585 – 590 .

3 Mushlin AI Mooney C Grow V Phelps CE . The value of diagnostic information to patients with suspected multiple sclerosis. Rochester-Toronto MRI Study Group. Arch Neurol 1994; 51: 67 – 72 .

4 Mushlin AI Mooney C Holloway RG Detsky AS Mattson DH Phelps CE . The cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging for patients with equivocal neurological symptoms. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997; 13: 21 – 34 .

5 Barkhof F Filippi M Miller DH Scheltens P Campi A Polman C . Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 1997; 120: 2059 – 2069 .

6 Polman CH Reingold SC Edan G . Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the ‘McDonald Criteria’. Ann Neurol 2005; 58: 840 – 846 .

7 McDonald WI Compston A Edan G . Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001; 50: 121 – 127 .

8 Schumacher G BG Kibler R Kurland L Kurtzke J McDowell F . Problems of experimental trials in multiple sclerosis. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1965; 122: 552 – 568 .

9 Poser CM Paty DW Scheinberg L . New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 1983; 13: 227 – 231 .

10.

10 O'Riordan JI Thompson AJ Kingsley DP . The prognostic value of brain MRI in clinically isolated syndromes of the CNS. A 10-year follow-up. Brain 1998; 121: 495 – 503 .

11.

11 Filippi M Rocca MA . Magnetic resonance imaging techniques to define and monitor tissue damage and repair in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 2007; 254: I55 – I62 .