RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the diagnostic criteria, ancillary investigations and treatment response using real-life data in multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) patients. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data were collected from 110 patients enrolled in the Italian MMN database through a structured questionnaire. Twenty-six patients were excluded due to the unavailability of nerve conduction studies or the presence of clinical signs and symptoms and electrodiagnostic abnormalities inconsistent with the MMN diagnosis. Analyses were conducted on 73 patients with a confirmed MMN diagnosis and 11 patients who did not meet the diagnostic criteria. RESULTS: The European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS) diagnostic criteria were variably applied. AUTHOR: When applying the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine criteria, an additional 17% of patients fulfilled the criteria for probable/definite diagnosis whilst a further 9.5% missed the diagnosis. In 17% of the patients only compound muscle action potential amplitude, but not area, was measured and subsequently recorded in the database by the treating physician. Additional investigations, including anti-GM1 immunoglobulin M antibodies, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, nerve ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, supported the diagnosis in 46%-83% of the patients. Anti-GM1 immunoglobulin M antibodies and nerve ultrasound demonstrated the highest sensitivity. Additional tests were frequently performed outside the EFNS/PNS guideline recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into the real-world diagnostic and management strategies for MMN, highlighting the challenges in applying diagnostic criteria.
Assuntos
Doença dos Neurônios Motores , Polineuropatias , Humanos , Polineuropatias/diagnóstico , Nervos Periféricos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Imunoglobulina M , Itália , Condução Nervosa/fisiologia , Doença dos Neurônios Motores/diagnóstico , Doença dos Neurônios Motores/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are different criteria for the diagnosis of different variants of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). The 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) guidelines provide specific clinical criteria for each CIDP variant even if their therapeutical impact has not been investigated. METHODS: We applied the clinical criteria for CIDP variants of the 2021 EAN/PNS guidelines to 369 patients included in the Italian CIDP database who fulfilled the 2021 EAN/PNS electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP. RESULTS: According to the 2021 EAN/PNS clinical criteria, 245 patients achieved a clinical diagnosis of typical CIDP or CIDP variant (66%). We identified 106 patients with typical CIDP (29%), 62 distal CIDP (17%), 28 multifocal or focal CIDP (7%), four sensory CIDP (1%), 27 sensory-predominant CIDP (7%), 10 motor CIDP (3%), and eight motor-predominant CIDP (2%). Patients with multifocal, distal, and sensory CIDP had milder impairment and symptoms. Patients with multifocal CIDP had less frequently reduced conduction velocity and prolonged F-wave latency and had lower levels of cerebrospinal fluid protein. Patients with distal CIDP more frequently had reduced distal compound muscle action potentials. Patients with motor CIDP did not improve after steroid therapy, whereas those with motor-predominant CIDP did. None of the patients with sensory CIDP responded to steroids, whereas most of those with sensory-predominant CIDP did. CONCLUSIONS: The 2021 EAN/PNS criteria for CIDP allow a better characterization of CIDP variants, permitting their distinction from typical CIDP and more appropriate treatment for patients.